N.Dharman v. Raghunathan
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court of Madras dismissed a Civil Revision Petition challenging the Munsif Court's order rejecting an application to recall witnesses after evidence was concluded.
What did the court decide?
The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed; no costs awarded; connected petition closed.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.03.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR
CRP(PD)No.529 of 2018
and
CMP.No.2759 of 2018
N.Dharman .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.Raghunathan
2.Mahendiran
3.Easwari @ Samundeeswari ... Respondents
PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated 13.12.2017 passed in I.A.No.1201 of 2017 in O.S.No.192 of 2013 by the learned Additional District Munsif Court at Tirupattur.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Michael Visuvasam
For R1 : No appearance
For R2 and R3 : Mr.K.Velayutha Raja
* * * * *
O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and decreetal order dated 13.12.2017 passed in I.A.No.1201 of 2017 in O.S.No.192 of 2013 by the Hon'ble Additional District Munsif Court at Tirupattur.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the application to reopen evidence after the conclusion of evidence under Order 18 Rule 17 C.P.C.
Whether the power under Order 18 Rule 17 C.P.C. can be invoked to recall witnesses to fill gaps in evidence already presented before adding new points.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
N.Dharman
- respondent
Raghunathan
- respondent
Mahendiran
- respondent
Easwari @ Samundeeswari
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court