The petitioner challenged the trial court's refusal to permit cross-examination questions. The High Court held that relevancy is difficult to examine at every stage and left the matter open for a regular civil appeal if the suit is decreed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 4105 OF 2007
Atmaram Bajirao Nanavare & ors.... Petitioner
versus
Smt. Sheshabai Balu Nanavare ...... Respondent.
Shri Amit Shete for the petitioner
Shri V.S. Talkute fopr respondent.
CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J.
DATED; 23RD OCTOBER, 2007
P.C.;
1. As the trial Court refused permission to the
learned counsel for the petitioner to put a question
in cross examination, this Writ Petition has been
filed contending that the question asked by the
learned counsel for the petitioner was relevant. It
is difficult to examine the relevancy of each question
and subject the proceedings to scrutiny at every
stage. All questions raised in this petition are left
open to be raised by the petitioner in a regular civil
appeal if and in case the suit is decreed. The Writ
Petiion is therefore dismissed.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can examine the relevancy of questions in cross-examination to grant permission in a writ petition.
Atmaram Bajirao Nanavare & ors.
Smt. Sheshabai Balu Nanavare
A.P. Deshpande
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court