The petitioner challenged the rejection of his application for cross-examination in an eviction suit, alleging denial of opportunity. The court noted that the petitioner had been granted opportunities previously but failed to avail them, leading to the closure of his right to cross-examine. The writ petition was dismissed.
null
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.
2024:BHC-NAG:7999
1 935.WP.1057-2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1057 OF 2024
( Mohan S/o Gopaldas Surjan Vs.
Anant S/o Baburao Hajare )
Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders
Mr. P.R. Chakole, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. A.H. Joshi, Advocate for the Respondent.
CORAM: N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATED : 9th JULY, 2024
Heard.
2 . This Petition takes exception to the order dated 29.11.2023 passed by the 2nd Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Nagpur below Exh. 61 in R.C.S. No. 453/2012. The Respondent herein has filed the suit for eviction and possession against the Petitioner. By the order impugned, the learned Trial Court has rejected the application filed by the present Petitioner for grant of opportunity to cross examine the Respondent.
3 . I have perused the impugned order. The Respondent had filed the affidavit of examination-in-chief on 19.08.2013. The cross-examination was not conducted for more than one year and thus on 28.01.2015 the right of
2 935.WP.1057-2024.odt
Petitioner to cross-examine the Respondent was closed. It appears that though, thereafter opportunity was granted to the Petitioner, however again cross-examination was not conducted and thus again on 13.08.2018, the right of Petitioner to cross-examine was closed. It appears that, thereafter also opportunity was granted, but again it was not avail.
4 . Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order.
6 . Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(N.R. BORKAR, J.)
SD. Bhimte
Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 26/07/2024 16:52:41
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Small Causes Court properly refused the petitioner's application for cross-examination after multiple opportunities were granted and lapsed?
Mohan
Anant
N.R. Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
3 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
