The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the dismissal of an application to recall a witness for handwriting comparison, holding it was filed to delay proceedings after the defendant's evidence was closed and post-judgment posting.
The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1601 OF 2010
DATED:23-04- 2010.
Between
V.Anantha Lakshmi
… Petitioner
And
K.Venkata Raju
…Respondent
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1601 OF 2010
ORDER:
This revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order, dated 15-03-2010, in I.A.No.239 of 2010 in O.S.No.25 of 2006, on the file of the Senior Judge, Narsapur, whereunder and whereby the application filed under Section 151 CPC to recall P.W.4 for directing him to write the matter for specification of hand writing for comparing with Exs.A1 and A2 by sending the same to handwriting expert for comparison and opinion, was dismissed.
2. After the evidence of the defendant was closed, after hearing the arguments and when the matter was posted for judgment, the present application was filed to recall P.W.4 for taking admitted hand writings for the purpose of comparison and opinion. No explanation was forthcoming as to why such an application was not filed when P.W.4 testified in the Court. Therefore, the present application appears to have been filed only to drag on the proceedings when the case was posted for judgment. Hence, the trial Court rightly dismissed the application and there are no grounds to set aside the impugned order.
3. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
K.C.BHANU, J
DATED:23-04- 2010 Hsd
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court correctly dismissed the application to recall Witness 4 for handwriting comparison as it appears to have been filed to drag proceedings at a judgment posting.
Whether there are grounds to set aside the trial court's dismissal of the recalled witness application under the inherent powers of the court.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
V. Anantha Lakshmi
K. Venkata Raju
K.C. Bhanu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
