Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Abdul Quddhose, J
J.S.Rajasekaran Davamani – Appellant
Versus
Samuel M J – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to complete cross-examination due to unavailable evidence warrants reconsideration. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court oversight to facilitate fair trial completion within defined timelines. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORDER
This Civil Revision Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order, dated 23.02.2026 passed in I.A.No.11 of 2026 in O.S.No.1710 of 2023 on the file of IV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai.
2. Under the aforesaid order, the trial court has rejected the petitioner’s application seeking to recall the plaintiffs’ witness. Earlier, the evidence of the plaintiffs was closed, since the petitioner, who is the 1st defendant in the suit, failed to complete the cross-examination of the plaintiffs’ witness. The petitioner contends that since he was not having the copy of the pendrive, which was marked as an exhibit on the side of the plaintiffs, he was not able to complete the cross-examination of the plaintiffs’ witness.
3. After hearing the arguments of both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondents/caveators, this Court suggested that the petitioner may be permitted to cross-examine the plaintiffs’ witness and a direction can be issued
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
