Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
Kanmani W/o. Naveen Kumar – Appellant
Versus
A.M. Naveen Kumar S/o. Manoharraj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the necessity to recall a witness due to omitted questions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. preservation of rights in cross-examination. (Para 6) |
| 3. decision on maintenance obligations. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition to set aside the order passed in IA.No.4 of 2025 in HMOP No.1669 of 2017 dated 16.06.2025 on the file of the Family Court, Coimbatore.
2. Challenging the impugned order passed in I.A. No. 4 of 2025 in HMOP No. 1669 of 2017, the petitioner/wife has filed this revision.
3. Before the Trial Court, the petitioner filed an application seeking to recall and further examine her husband, stating that certain important questions were inadvertently omitted during cross-examination. However, the said application was dismissed by the learned Trial Judge. Aggrieved by the same, she has preferred this revision.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, during the earlier cross-examination, some important questions were inadvertently not put to the witness, and therefore she sought recall of the husband for further cross-
examination.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent strongly objected, stating that the cross-examination of th
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
