IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO.15505 OF 2015 (GM-CPC) & WRIT PETITION NO.18288 OF 2015 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN :
1. Smt. Sharmila W/o. Late Anantha Kumar Aged about 44 years 2. Aneesha A Shetty D/o. Late Anantha Kumar Aged about 20 years 3. Apoorva A Shetty D/o. Late Anantha Kumar Aged about 18 years 4. Ameesha A Shetty D/o. Late Anantha Kumar Aged about 16 years Since minor represented by her Mother and natural guardian Smt. Sharmila All are resident of Sarigere, Umbalebailu Post Shimoga Taluk and District – 577 115. …..Petitioners (By Sri Harish Kumar M.S., Advocate) AND:
K.P. Duggappa Gowda S/o. Putte Gowda Aged about 53 years R/o Umblebylu, Nidige Hobli Shimoga Taluk and District – 577 115. Respondent (Respondent served) These writ petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the order dated 09.03.2015 passed on I.A.No.XXII & XXIII in OS No.351/2007 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) at Shimoga vide Annexure-H and allow the application filed by the petitioner i.e., I.A.No.XXII & XXIII.
These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the court made the following:-
O R D E R The petitioners who are applicants, made an application under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC and under Section 151 of CPC to reopen the case and to recall PW1 for further cross-examination.
2. The trial Court has held that the application does not contain reasons for which PW1 was required to be recalled and it had not been stated as to on what points the legal representatives of 2nd defendant wanted to cross-examine PW1.
3. In my view, the reasons assigned by the trial Court cannot be sustained. In law, it is for applicant to ask such questions he seems proper to elucidate the matters in issue and those that are permissible in law.
4. The application seeking to recall a witness is not bound to disclose the question that he seeks to ask the witness in his application. Having regard to the fact that fair opportunity should be granted to legal representatives of 2nd defendant to cross-examine PW.1, the impugned order passed by Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) at Shimoga in OS No.351/2007 on I.A.Nos.22 and 23 is set aside and legal representatives of 2nd defendant are permitted to cross-examine PW1.
5. The undertaking of the petitioners that they will conclude the cross-examination on the date, PW1 appears before the Court is hereby placed on record.
Writ petitions are thus allowed.
Sd/- JUDGE nms