CHANNEGOWDA AND ORS. Vs. SIDDAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are the defendants in O.S. No. 258 of 2009 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kanakapura. Being aggrieved by the order dated 15-12-2014 dismissing the application filed for reopening and recalling P.W. 1 for cross-examination, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions. The respondents herein had filed the suit seeking for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and for other reliefs. The contesting defendants filed written statement denying the averments made in the plaint. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Trial Court framed necessary issues. The plaintiffs in order to prove their case have examined the first plaintiff as P.W. 1. The case was posted for cross-examination of P.W. 1. However, the first defendant is dragging the matter. Though P.W. 1 was present before the Court on 27-9-2014, the first defendant has not chosen to cross-examine him. In view of that, the cross-examination of P.W. 1 was recorded as NIL. Thereafter the defendants filed an application for recalling the said order and also contended that due to unavoidable circumstances, he could not be present before the Court on 27-9-2014 and sought for one more opportunity to cross-examine P.W. 1. The Trial Court by its cryptic order dated 15-12-2014 rejected the application. The Court has not assigned any reason. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petitions are filed.

(2.) Sri Vishnu Hegde, learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that due to unavoidable circumstances he could not be present before the Court on 27-9-2014, if one more opportunity is given, he will cross-examine P.W. 1 and co-operate for disposal of the matter.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents argued in support of the order passed by the Trial Court.