The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a writ petition challenging a session judge's order refusing an application for fresh cross-examination. The court found no illegality or perversity in the lower court's decision.
The writ petition challenging the order rejecting the application for cross-examination was dismissed.
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.
<
Hl-l4)^ ^eer""ETTOTcTO ^c^TIre, f6tcllt14.'< C^.7T.)
^rr. T^T. t cTc^ ^cr. i^T.•c^. ^ ^S ^FPTH' 57 cT^, PlclKfl11 'FT'K STT'T? , u],iqi^| ag^d ^f,R-fRd'cf^gf^fcTT--gTf .^.)
^tTft. ^. ^|c||^c|,
T- 22/22^IF%^TrR T,arr-TT ^[^TT, 'cft^t ^f?r ^T?,'f$ra7^FK, aSt'ild^T f^TT ^f (^.TT.)
R't'Xt
f^
^JI. W.P.- 1 No.* /j5 I /2013 (S.B.)
•i4lfqqiiq5al/yfaq|cfl<» 1
A^
<*s^>
""-.. ^-^^:
-""--$^^^
"^^^
^
.dTCi'<ciic[1/c|i4141
^fttt, dp^^\ 31HTST, ^f?ffltuT'Hgctii^ TratfcT ^RTT^ ^K, 'B'.^T. ^ f^TT ^if Li'u'il^cn,
•<'1SCM'<1 W TT^ ^TcR ^fq-^ ITRT, '^lf, IE?.TT.
yTCi<(qi(?1<i"i/yR|cii<S1^|u|
<3
1lu'1 s?l
"i5 II;
1& ^ t7
[r
•^ ^ 't?
^
td @ G R
^
tw 'tu'
I~CMN
\3)
^
'«e
r,
'lt^
^.
^
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SB : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER
W.P.(227) N0. 734 of 2013
PETITIONER (Defendant)
G.S.Dey
Versus
RBSPONDENTS Smt. Anjana Shrivastaya and (PIaintiffs) Others
WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTiON OF INDIA
Shri Rajendra Patel, counsel for the petitioner.
ORDER (18.10.2013)
Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 9.9.2013 passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Durg in Civil Suit No. 27-A/2011 rejecting the application as filed by the petitioner under Order 18 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC. After considering the application in detail learned coui'i below has come to the conclusion that there is no need to cr&ss examine the witnesses afresh.
1 find no illegality or perversity in the order impugrie-i warranting interference by this Court under Article 227 of tiii. Constitution of India. The petition is sans merits, the same deserves to be and is, accordingly dismissed in limine.
c>&)lm^
^<^^e
•'••<-t
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order rejecting a cross-examination application.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
G.S.Dey
Shrivastaya
Pritinker Diwaker
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
