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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 39310

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J
S.Manikandan – Appellant
Versus
K.Ranganayaki – Respondent
CMP NO. 9471 OF 2025



Advocates:
For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Karthik Eswaran
For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Saikrishnan

Courts must grant opportunity for cross-examination despite one party's delays to ensure procedural fairness.

Headnote:Article 227 of the Constitution of India governs the supervisory jurisdiction exercised in this civil revision petition concerning reopening of proceedings in a matrimonial original petition (HMOP No. 893 of 2021). The petitioner/husband sought directions to allow the respondent/wife's application (IA No. 04 of 2024) for cross-examination of PW1 after chief examination on 24.08.2023, with cross postponed multiple times at petitioner's request and closed on 14.12.2023, followed by respondent being set ex parte on 11.01.2024. The trial court dismissed the application, finding the petitioner casual and parties cannot reset proceedings at whims. The High Court set aside the trial court's findings to provide one more opportunity to parties, noting petitioner's delays. The key issue was whether the trial court erred in refusing to reopen for cross-examination despite petitioner's repeated adjournments. The ratio decidendi holds that casual conduct by a party causing delays does not justify denying the other party an opportunity for cross-examination, and proceedings should not be closed mechanically; courts must ensure fairness by granting opportunities where delays are attributable to one side. The Civil Revision Petition is allowed, IA No. 04 of 2024 is allowed, trial court's findings set aside, petitioner directed to cooperate, and trial court to dispose applications within six months.

Table of Content
1. petition to reopen for cross-examination after trial court dismissal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. pw1 examination timeline and ex-parte setting justify reopening. (Para 3)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CMP NO. 9471 OF 2025 S.Manikandan ..Petitioner(s)

Vs K.Ranganayaki ..Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Subordinate Court, Alandur to reopen the case in HMOP No. 893 of 2021, to enable respondent to cross-examine the PW1/Petitioner, and by allowing IA.No. 04 of 2024 and also pass a suitable order in nature and circumstance of the case by allowing this CRP.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Karthik Eswaran For Respondent(s): Mr.T.Saikrishnan

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioner / husband to direct the Subordinate Court, Alandur to reopen the case in HMOP No. 893 of 2021, to enable respondent / wife to cross-examine the PW1/Petitioner, and by allowing IA.No. 04 of 2024.

2. The respondent / husband filed an application before the trial court to reopen the case. The Court below having noticed that the petitioner/husband was very casual in conducting the proceedings and the parties could not be permitted to reset the stage as per their whims and fancies and accordingly, dismissed the application.

3. It is seen from PW1 was examined in chief on 24.08.2023 and the case was posted for PW1 cross on various dates at the request of the petitioner / husband and was closed on 14.12.2023. Then the case was posted for respondent side evidence on 11.01.2024 and on that date, she was called absent and set exparte. Therefore, in order to give one more opportunity to the parties, the findings of the trial court is set aside. I.A.No.4 of 2024 is allowed. The revision petitioner is directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings and also trial court is directed to try both the applications.

4. With the above observation, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed.

The trial judge is directed to dispose of the applications within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

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 Back to top