Allowed

L.R. Prasanna Kumar v. Saravana Eshwar P Kumar

Karnataka HC12 Jun 2024WP/10820/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash a trial court order refusing to reopen a case. The court permitted the petitioner to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness on the next date to meet the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order rejecting applications to reopen the case was set aside, and the petitioner was permitted to cross-examine PW.1 on the next date.

L.R. Prasanna Kumar Vs Saravana Eshwar P… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:20786 WP No. 10820 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.10820 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

L.R. PRASANNA KUMAR

¶8

S/O. LATE SRI L.R. RAMACHANDRAIAH AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.620, 2D CROSS, 6TH A MAIN, 2ND BLOCK KALYAN NAGAR, HRBR LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 043.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI PRADEEP S. SAWKAR, M/S.SUNDARASWAMY AND SRI RAMDAS, ADVOCATES)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI

¶13

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SARAVANA ESHWAR P. KUMAR S/O. LATE SRI T.N. PRASANNAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT FLAT NO.301 1279, 14TH CROSS INDIRANAGAR II STAGE BENGALURU-560 038.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI V.B. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R.)

¶17

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2024 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE LXXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (COMMERCIAL COURT) I.A.NOS.1 AND 2, ANNEXURES-B AND C RESPECTIVELY IN COMMERCIAL O.S.NO.955 OF 2023, ETC.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:20786 WP No. 10820 of 2024

¶20

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The short question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the trial court erred in not permitting the petitioner to reopen the case and cross examine PW.1.

¶23

The petitioner is the defendant in Commercial O.S.No.955/2023. PW.1 is the plaintiff/respondent herein.

¶24

He had examined himself on 11.03.2024. On 21.03.2024, when the case was posted for cross examination of PW.1, it is submitted that the Counsel for the

¶25

defendant/petitioner herein was not present as he was not keeping well. The trial court closed the cross examination of PW.1. Hence, the defendant/petitioner herein made the applications for reopening the case and cross examine PW.1. The trial court based on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Limited vs. K.S.Infraspace LLP and Another [(2020)15 SCC 585] ,

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:20786 WP No. 10820 of 2024

¶28

rejected the said applications. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner pleads that for reasons beyond his control he was not in a position to cross examine PW.1. He submits that if an opportunity is granted to cross examine PW.1, he will do so without asking for further adjournments and co-operate for quick disposal of the case. He further submits that if he is not given an opportunity to cross examine PW.1, he will be put to irreparable loss and injury. He categorically submits that lapse was not due to the petitioner but because of the Counsel as he was not well on that day. It is seen from the order sheet of the trial court that the petitioner herein has not unnecessarily tried to protract the proceedings.

¶30

Given the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, without going into merits of the order passed by the trial court and without making this as a precedent, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:20786 WP No. 10820 of 2024

¶32

met if an opportunity is given to the petitioner herein to cross examine PW.1.

¶33

5. Hence, the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) The writ petition is hereby allowed;

¶36

(ii) The impugned order dated 01.04.2024 passed by LXXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (Commercial Court) on the applications in Commercial O.S.No.955 of 2023 is hereby set aside;

¶37

(iii) The petitioner herein is permitted to cross examine PW.1 on the next date of hearing before the trial court without seeking for further adjournments and also shall co-operate with the trial court for quick disposal of the case.

¶38

hkh.

¶39

Sd/JUDGE

L.R. Prasanna Kumar v. Saravana Eshwar P Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.R. Prasanna Kumar v. Saravana Eshwar P Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.J. Savitha Vs the Commissioner

V Basavarajaiah Vs State of Karnataka

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Quest Global Engineering Services Private Limited

Smt Chennamma Vs Smt R Jessimani

Sri. N. B. Shantha Murthy Vs Smt. Rudramma

Sri. Sathish Kini Ullal Vs U Sudhakar Kini