Justin v. Manoj Kumar
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court of Kerala permitted the petitioner to recall and cross-examine PW1 in a pending election petition where the trial court examined the witness without setting the petitioner ex-parte after rejecting an adjournment request.
What did the court decide?
Directed the court below to add the case to the list on 27.08.2016 and permit the petitioner to recall PW1 and cross-examine him before proceeding with the trial.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/14TH SRAVANA, 1938
OP(C).No. 1640 of 2016 (O)
OP(ELECTION)NO.1/2015 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR.
PETITIONER/1ST COUNTER PETITIONER:
JUSTIN JOSEPH, S/O.KURIAN JOSEPH, AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT THOTTIL HOUSE, AARPOOKKARA EAST.P.O., AARPOOKKARA VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.SAJEEVAN KURUKKUTTIYULLATHIL SMT.SARITHA THOMAS
RESPONDENT(S)/ORIGINAL PETITIONER AND COUNTER PETITIONERS 2 TO 4:
1. SRI. V.R.MANOJ KUMAR @ PARAYIL MANOJKUMAR, S/O.BALARAMAN NAIR, AGED 48 YEARS, VECHUVEETTIL HOUSE, AARPPOOKKARA POST.P.O., AARPOOKKARA VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 008.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Munsiff court proceedings were proper by examining the respondent without setting the petitioner ex-parte after dismissing his adjournment application.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to cross-examine the witness PW1 who had already been examined by the opposing party.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Justin Joseph
- respondent
V.R.Manoj Kumar
Coram
K.Ramakrishnan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court