Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. KRISHNA KUMAR, J
RADHAKRISHNA KURIES PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
MANIKANTAN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges dismissal of witness examination application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. trial court deemed application belated. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court permits examination and directs expeditious disposal. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.288/2016 on the file of Munsiff Magistrate Court, Pattambi. The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order in this petition.
2. As per Ext.P5, the trial court dismissed Ext.P4 application filed by the petitioner for examining two witnesses, the Branch Manager and Manager of the petitioner company.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
4. As per the impugned order, the trial court observed that the petitioner could have filed the application earlier, but they waited till the cross- examination of the defendants and submitted the application at a belated stage.
5. On considering the grounds raised in the petition as well as the reasons stated in the impugned order, I am of the view that the petitioner is to be permitted to examine those two witnesses to prove the plaint claim. The delay in filing the application, in the circumstances of the present case, ought not have been the sole ground for dismissing the
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
