The petitioner challenged under Article 227 the Trial Court's refusal to permit cross-examination of a co-defendant. The High Court held that the co-defendant's joint written statement provided prior opportunity and held no interference was warranted.
No order as to costs.
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.
1
mst
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.7962 OF 2008
Pundlik Tukaram Satam Petitioner versus
Smt.Seema Narayan Satam and another
Respondents
H.S.S.Murthy i/by V.K.N arkar for petitioner. A.A.Kumbhakoni a/w T.R.Yadav i/by Ms.Seema Chopda for Respdt.no.1. Ajit Salvi for respondent no.3.
CORAM : A.S.OKA, J.
DATE : 21st April 2010
PC :
2
chief. After cross examination of the second respondent was made, an application was made by the petitioner seeking permission to cross examine the second respondent on the ground that in the cross examination of second respondent made by the first respondent, she has made statements which are adverse to the interest of petitioner. The said application has been rejected by the impugned order.
3
examine the petitioner’s witnesses serious objection was raised by the petitioners and the Trial Court did not permit the advocate for the second respondent to cross examine the witnesses examined by the petitioner. It is noted in the impugned order that after the affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief was filed by the second respondent, the advocate for the petitioner was called upon to cross examine the second respondent. However, the learned advocate declined to cross examine the witnesses and stated that if required, he will cross examine the second respondent after the cross examination of the plaintiff was over.
4
given by the second respondent, now the petitioner cannot be permitted to cross examine the second respondent.
(A.S.OKA, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should allow the petitioner to cross-examine a co-defendant who made adverse statements during cross-examination by the plaintiff.
Pundlik Tukaram Satam
Smt. Seema Narayan Satam
A.S.Oka
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
