Jaison K.Sani v. Rasna
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court Kerala set aside Family Court order discontinuing petitioner's cross-examination. Court directed lower court to follow Rule 146 procedure: record witness objections as memorandum and remarks, then seek signature before proceeding.
What did the court decide?
Set aside Ext.P7 order; rematter to Family Court with direction to record objections as memorandum under Rule 146, add remarks, then direct petitioner to sign before allowing further cross-examination
What the court decided
“CR”
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/27TH MAGHA, 1938
OP (FC).No. 5 of 2017 (R)
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OP 764/2012 of FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA
PETITIONER:
JAISON K.SANI S/O.THEKKEKARA KORATH VEETTIL SANI, PULLUR DESOM & VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN
RESPONDENT:
RASNA D/O.KOKKADAN VEETTIL JOSEPH, PUTHUKKAD DESOM, THORAV VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 301.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Family Court committed illegality by discontinuing cross-examination when the petitioner refused to sign deposition after raising objections under Rule 146 of Civil Rules of Practice?
Whether the Presiding Officer is required to record objections made by a witness against the correctness of the deposition under Rule 146 of Civil Rules of Practice?
Whether the deposition can be corrected at the instance of the witness after submission has been completed?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Jaison K.Sani S/O.Thekkekkara Korath Veettil Sani
- respondent
Rasna D/O.Kokkadon Veettil Joseph
Coram
A.M. Shauffique
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court