Allowed

Shri. Basagouda S/O Ramappa Narasannavar v. the Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd.

Karnataka HC6 Jun 2022WP/101858/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the dismissal of applications seeking reopening of an O.S. to cross-examine a witness. The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the trial court to permit cross-examination upon payment of costs, emphasizing that witness efficacy is clouded without cross-examination despite prior similar filings.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 16.04.2022 on I.A.Nos.10 and 11 in O.S.No.18/2018 is quashed and set aside. Petitioners are directed to pay costs of ₹2,000 to the plaintiff, after which the Trial Court must

Shri. Basagouda S/O Ramappa Narasannavar Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 101858 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.DEVDAS

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 101858 OF 2022 (GM-CPC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI. BASAGOUDA S/O RAMAPPA NARASANNAVAR AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED E E, R/O. BASAVA KRUPA, BEHIND COURT CAMPUS, GOKAK, DIST. BELAGAVI 591307.

¶10

RAJASHEKAR S/O SHANTAPPA BELLUNKE AGE. 63 YEARS, OCC. RETD., ASSISTANT E.E., C/O. RAJENDRA PATIL, JOGAL ROAD, SHIRAGUPPA, ATHANI TALUK, BELAGAVI DISTRICT 591242.

¶11

VINAYAKA B V Digitally signed byVINAYAKA B V Location: Dharwad Date: 2022.06.09 10:23:45 +0530

¶12

SHRIKANT S/O GURAPPA TAFAKIRE AGE 1 YEARS, OCC RETD E.E. R/O VANTAMURI COLONY SATYA MARGA NEAR LAST BUS STOP BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI TALUK AND DISTRICT 590017.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. SHARAD V MAGADUM, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE)

¶15

¶16

WP No. 101858 of 2022

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD., R/BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER GRBC, DIVISION NO. 3, GOKAK BELAGAVI DISTRICT - 591307.

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI. K. S. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT THE ORDER ON IA NO 10 AND 11 FILED UNDER ORDER 18 RULE 17 R/W SECTION 151 AND UNDER SECTION 151 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 DATED 16/04/2022 PASSED IN OS NO 18/2018 PENDING ON THE FILE I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE GOKAK AT ANNEXURE-G AND ETC.

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

R.DEVDAS J., (ORAL):

¶25

The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved of the impugned order dated 16.04.2022 whereby two applications in I.A.Nos.10 and 11 filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC were dismissed. The applications were filed seeking reopening of the case and recalling of the PW-1 for cross-examination on the ground that the learned Counsel was engaged before the

¶26

¶27

WP No. 101858 of 2022

¶28

Karnataka Appellate Tribunal sitting at Belagavi and he was not able to attend to the court proceedings that day.

¶29

Although learned Counsel for the respondent-The Karnataka Neeravari Nigama Ltd., seeks to contend that this is not the first time such applications are filed by the petitioners to permit the petitioners to cross-examination of PW-1, this Court is of the considered opinion that unless the witness is cross-examined, the very efficacy of the evidence tendered by the witness would be under a cloud. Nevertheless, taking into consideration the fact that even earlier such applications were filed at the hands of the petitioners, this Court deems it fit to impose costs on the petitioners and permit them to cross-examine PW.1.

¶30

Consequently, the writ petition is allowed . The impugned order dated 16.04.2022 passed on I.A.Nos.10 and 11 filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 of CPC, in O.S.No.18/2018 on the file of I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Gokak is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶31

¶32

WP No. 101858 of 2022

¶33

The petitioners shall pay costs of `2000/- to the plaintiff before the Trial Court and thereafter the Trial Court shall permit cross-examination of PW.1. The crossexamination of PW.1 shall be concluded as far as possible on the same day and if by chance, the cross-examination spills over, the same shall be concluded on the next date of hearing.

¶34

Ordered accordingly.

¶35

SD JUDGE

¶36

Shri. Basagouda S/O Ramappa Narasannavar v. the Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Basagouda S/O Ramappa Narasannavar v. the Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Kishor Krishnaji Pawar Vs the Chairman

Anand Basavavataray @ Basavantaray Sasanur Vs Sureshbabu S/O Mahantappa Nidagundi

Yallappa S/O Adiveppa Batakhani Vs Mallikarjunappa S/O Basappa Battur

Smt. Rekha W/O Ningappa Kolala Vs Sri. Ningappa S/O Shivalingappa Kolala

Vinayak Ramachandra Gayakawad Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Shashikala W/O Iranna Ganiger Vs Iranna S/O Shivaputrappa Ganiger