ORIGINAL JURISDICTION - Orissa High Court

2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 368
SANJU PANDA, J.
SOUBHAGYA MOHANTY -V- HAREKRUSHNA MOHANTY & ORS.*
JANUARY 14, 2010.
113
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) – ORDER 18,
RULE 17.
Recall of witness for further Cross-examination – Discretion of the
Court to allow at any time before delivery of judgment – Discretion
must be exercised judicially and on well accepted judicial principles
and not arbitrarily or capriciously – The Court should exercise the
discretion with an aim for giving full opportunity to the parties to
present their case and not to fill up their lacuna or drag the
proceeding.
In the present case P.W.1 was earlier examined and Crossexamined
– He was also further cross-examined as per the direction of
this Court– Successive applications filed on the same plea was
dismissed by the trial Court – Held, there is no error apparent on the
face of the impugned order for interference by this Court.
(Para 8 & 9)
Case laws Referred to:-
1. AIR 1981 Punjab & Haryana 157 : (Om Prakash -V-Sarupa & Ors.).
2. AIR 1984 Delhi 439 : (Suresh Kumar -V-Baldev Raj).
3. 2005 (Supp) OLR 791 : (Sk.Mustafa & Anr.-V-Additional
District Judge,Jajpur & Ors).
For Petitioner – M/s.A.R.Dash, R.N.Behera, P.K.Behera, K.S.Sahu
& S.N.Sahoo.
For Opp.Parties – M/s.B.Bhuyan, B.N.Mishra & C.R.Swain.
*W.P.(C) NO.17609 OF 2009. In the matter of an application under Articles
226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.
S. PANDA, J. In this writ application, challenge has been made to the
order dated 11.11.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division),
Bhubaneswar in Civil Suit No.595 of 2005 rejecting an application to recall
the plaintiffs’ witness for further cross-examination.
2. The facts as narrated in the writ application are as follows: