This two-judge bench of the High Court of Karnataka disposed of preliminary writ petitions challenging an order enhancing costs on defendants for allowing recall of a defending witness without prior cross-examination.
The order passed by the civil court on IA No.XII and XIII is modified to enhance costs to Rs. 2,000 payable by plaintiffs.
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 KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST 2014
BEFORE
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
WRIT PETITION NOS.39777 TO 39778 OF 2014
Between:
And:
These writ petitions are filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the order dated 31.07.2014 passed on IA No.XII and XIII in OS No.109/2010 on the file of the Civil Judge (JD.) Holenarasipur vide Annexure – K and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for preliminary hearing this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
Court. It transpires that the evidence of the defendants having
been completed, DW1 was not offered for cross-examination.
The DW1 having been examined-in-chief, for one reason or the other, he was not cross-examined and his evidence was closed.
It is much later, when the matter was set down for final arguments, the plaintiffs filed an application to recall DW1. No reasons were assigned to explain the default in not cross-
examining the DW1 in the first instance. The Court below has
allowed the application on payment of costs of �200.00.
of the impugned order, the costs imposed appears to be paltry. The only relief that can be granted to the present petitioners is to enhance the costs to �2,000/- (rupees two thousand only), which shall be paid by the plaintiffs by the next date of hearing.
These petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
VGR
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the costs imposed in the lower court order are adequate and should be enhanced.
What relief, if any, the High Court should grant regarding the impugned order on costs.
H.P.Devaraju
H.D.Ravi
H.D.Mahesh
Smt.Puttathayamma
Smt.Honamma
Smt.Subbalakshmamma
ANAND BYRAREDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court