Case Note & Summary
The Karnataka State Financial Corporation (KSFC) filed writ petitions challenging an order dated 2.12.2013 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangalore, in O.S. No.56/2010. The suit was filed by M/s Siyaram Arcade and its partners (respondents 1-3) against KSFC and one N. Sukumar (respondent 4) for specific performance of an agreement to sell a property. KSFC had taken a loan from the plaintiff and allegedly agreed to sell the property. During trial, KSFC's counsel did not cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses due to non-appearance. The trial court closed the evidence of KSFC and later allowed the plaintiff to lead additional evidence. KSFC filed applications (I.A. Nos.11 and 12) to recall the plaintiff's witnesses for cross-examination and to set aside the order allowing additional evidence. The trial court dismissed these applications. The High Court, exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, held that the right to cross-examine is a valuable right and its denial violates natural justice. The court noted that the trial court had not recorded any reason for refusing recall and that the plaintiff's additional evidence was taken without affording KSFC an opportunity to cross-examine. The High Court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned order, and directed the trial court to permit KSFC to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses and to recall the plaintiff's witnesses for that purpose. The court also set aside the order allowing additional evidence and directed that the plaintiff's additional evidence be taken only after KSFC's cross-examination is completed.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Recall of Witnesses - Order 18 Rule 17 CPC - Right to Cross-Examine - The trial court refused to recall plaintiff's witnesses for cross-examination by the defendant (KSFC) despite the defendant not having cross-examined them earlier due to non-appearance of counsel. The High Court held that the right to cross-examine is a valuable right and its denial violates principles of natural justice. The court allowed the recall, setting aside the impugned order. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Additional Evidence - Order 18 Rule 17 CPC - The trial court allowed the plaintiff to lead additional evidence after the defendant's evidence was closed, without affording the defendant an opportunity to cross-examine. The High Court set aside this order, holding that it caused prejudice to the defendant. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in refusing to recall the plaintiff's witnesses for cross-examination by the defendant (KSFC) and in allowing the plaintiff to lead additional evidence after the defendant's evidence was closed.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the order dated 2.12.2013 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangalore, on I.A. Nos.11 and 12 in O.S. No.56/2010. The trial court was directed to permit KSFC to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses and to recall the plaintiff's witnesses for that purpose. The order allowing additional evidence was also set aside, and the trial court was directed to take additional evidence only after KSFC's cross-examination is completed.
Law Points
- Right to cross-examine is a valuable right
- denial violates natural justice
- Order 18 Rule 17 CPC allows recall of witnesses for just cause
- Section 151 CPC saves inherent powers of court
- Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India allow supervisory jurisdiction
