SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 46029

SMT. V. LALITHAMMA – Appellant
Versus
THE CHIEF MANAGER – Respondent


The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated

15.02.2019, passed in O.S.No.116/2016, by the LIX

3

Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-

60), has filed this writ petition.

2. Brief facts leading rise to filing of this petition

are as under:

Petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.116/2016 for

mandatory

injunction

against

the

respondents.

Respondents No.1 and 3 filed written statement

separately. The Trial Court on the basis of pleadings

of parties, framed issues. Petitioner was examined as

PW-1

and

was

duly

cross-examined

by

the

respondents. Petitioner closed his side. The official of

respondent No.1 was examined as DW-1. During the

course of cross-examination, certain questions were

asked to DW-1 for which he tried to look into the

office file he had brought along with him to answer

the same. Petitioner raised objection stating that the

witness is not permitted to refer the office file. The

Trial Court overruled the objection and permitted DW-

4

1 to refer the file brought by him. Aggrieved by the

same, petitioner has filed this writ petition.

3. Notice was issued to respondent No.1.

Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.1 remained

unrepresented. Insofar as re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top