Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. The said submission cannot be accepted. D.W.1 is cross-examined on three dates on 23.06.2009, 05.03.2011 and 07.03.2011. After cross-examining D.W.1 at length on those three occasions, the evidence of D.W.1 was closed. Thereafter, the application is filed to further cross-examine D.W.1. Nothing is stated…
Judgment
(By Sri. Suresh N Kini, Adv.) AND
Sunil S/O Vishwanath Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age: 52 Years, Occ: Business, R/O Muslim Galli, Kasaba, Sirsi, Uttara Kannada.
Lata W/O Jaiwant Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : 45 Years, Occ: Teacher, R/O Sarakari Madari Prathamika School, ... Petitioner : 2 : Court Road, Sirsi.
2. Akshay S/O Jaiwant Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : 13 Years, Occ: Student, R/O Sarakari Madari Prathamika School, Court Road, Sirsi.
Mr.Prakash S/O Vishwanath Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar Age : 60 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/O Kasaba, Opp Telephone Exchange, Sirsi.
Ratna W/O Arun Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : Major, Occ: Household, R/O Yallapur Road, Sirsi. Anil S/O Vishwanth Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : Major, Occ: KSRTC Employee, R/O Narayanguru Nagar, Kasaba Sirsi..
Mohan S/O Vishwanath Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : Major, Occ: Nil, R/O Kasaba, Hubli Road, Sirsi.
Rekha W/O Suryakanth Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : Major, Occ: Nil, R/O Kasaba Marathikoppa, Sirsi.
Nalini W/O Srinivas Prabhu Age : Major, Occ: Household, R/O Nelekanni, Kasaba, Sirsi. : 3 :
Sailesh S/O Suryakanth Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age: Major, Occ: Business, R/O: Kasaba Marathikoppa, Sirsi.
Kiran S/O Suryakanth Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar, Age : Major, Occ: Business, R/O Kasaba Marathikoppa, Sirsi.
Vasant S/O. Suryakanth Shiveshkar @ Mashalkar Age : Major, Occ: Business, R/O Kasaba Marathikoppa, Sirsi.
Shalini Suresh Mardolkar, Age: Major, Occ: Nil, R/O: Kasaba, Near Telephone Exchange, Sirsi.
Radha Chandrakant Karkar, Age: Major, Occ: Nil, R/O: Kasaba, Near Telephone Exchange, Sirsi.
Malini Vishwanath Mashalkar, Age: Major, Occ: Household, R/O: Kasaba, Near Telephone Exchange, Sirsi.
Vijaya S Sheth, Age: Major, Occ: Household, R/O: Kasaba Marathikoppa, Sirsi.
Roopa Jaiwant Gudigar, Age: Major, Occ: Household, R/O: Mavinakoppa, Basalakoppa, Sirsi. : 4 :
Deepa Hemant Kandebarkar, Age: Major, Occ: Nil, R/O: Kasaba, Opp Telephone Exchange, Sirsi.
Smitha Suryakantha Mashalkar, Age: Major, Occ: Nil, R/O: Kasaba Marathikoppa, Sirsi.
Suresh Vishwanath Mashalkar, Age: Major, Occ: Coolie, R/O: Near Telephone Exchange Office, Sirsi. ... Respondent This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quashing the order dated 06.03.2012 in O.S.No.176/2003 passed by the court of Additional Civil Judge Sirsi on I.A.Nos. 22 produced at Annexure-G and allow the said application to recall DW-1. This writ petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Petitioner filed an application for recalling D.W.1 for further cross-examination. The said application is rejected by the impugned order. : 5 :
2. Sri. Suresh N.Kini, learned advocate for the petitioner submits that on 07.03.2011, the evidence of D.W.1 was treated to have been closed; on the very next day, the petitioner made an application for recalling D.W.1 for further cross-examination; the said application ought to have been allowed by the Court below inasmuch as the petitioner has not wasted the Court’s time.
The said submission cannot be accepted. D.W.1 is cross-examined on three dates on 23.06.2009, 05.03.2011 and 07.03.2011. After cross-examining D.W.1 at length on those three occasions, the evidence of D.W.1 was closed. Thereafter, the application is filed to further cross-examine D.W.1. Nothing is stated in the application as to what is the new point on which the cross-examination is to be made by the petitioner. The suit is of the year 2003. The same is being dragged on one pretext or the other. : 6 : Be that as it may, since the impugned order is just and proper, in the facts and circumstances, no interference is called for. Petition fails and the same is dismissed. (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4) (cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10) Kms
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.