Writ petitioner's identification application premature as evidence undisposed. Court dismisses petition but grants liberty to approach under CPC Order 26 Rule 9 when evidence closed.
Petitioner granted liberty to file application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC at appropriate stage regarding identification doubts.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.M.P. No.968 of 2018
2. 5.07.2018
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Admittedly, the evidence from all the sides has not been closed as yet. Under the circumstance and looking to the provision at Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C., this Court finds, the application was premature. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage. However, this Court gives liberty to the petitioner to file application under Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C. at appropriate stage, in the event, there still remain doubt involving the identification aspect and in such event, the same shall be considered and disposed of on its own merit and without being influenced by the observations already made in the impugned order.
The civil miscellaneous petition stands disposed of
with the above direction.
Issue urgent certified copy on proper application.
.…………………..…
(Biswanath Rath, J.)
Ayas
2
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for identification is premature before evidence is closed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ayas
Respondent(s) not named in text
Biswanath Rath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
