JAYAMMA Vs. RENUKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the first defendant in O.S. No. 50/2005 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ramanagara. Being aggrieved by the order dated 21 -11 -2012 rejecting I.A. Nos. 11 and 12 filed under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC and under Sec. 151 of CPC for recalling P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 and to reopen the case for cross -examination of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2., she has filed this writ petition.

(2.) Lakshmamma and Renuka had filed a suit seeking for partition and separate possession of 1/4th share in respect of the suit schedule properties by metes and bounds and for other reliefs. The contesting defendants filed written statement. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Trial Court framed necessary issues. On the basis of the said issues, the case was posted for trial. During the pendency of the suit, Lakshmamma died. Smt. Renuka got examined as P.W. 1 on 24 -09 -2010. Thereafter the case was posted for cross -examination of P.W. 1 on 1 -10 -2010. On 21 -10 -2010, though the case was posted for cross -examination of P.W. 1, there was no representation on the part of the defendants. Hence, the evidence of P.W. 1 was taken as NIL. The first defendant filed an application on 1 -12 -2010 under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC to recall P.W. 1, and permit her to cross -examine P.W. 1. On 29 -01 -2011, the case of P.W. 1 was reopened and the first defendant was permitted to cross -examine her. The first defendant partly cross -examined P.W. 1 on 16 -06 -2011 and 8 -12 -2011. In spite of giving sufficient opportunities, the defendants have not cross -examined P.W. 1. In view of that, the evidence of P.W. 1 was closed on 25 -05 -2012. Further the defendants have also failed to cross -examine P.W. 2. Hence, the evidence of P.W. 2 was closed on 29 -05 -2012. The case was posted for defendants' evidence. At that stage, the present applications I.A. No. 11 and 12 were filed for recalling P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 and also to permit the defendants to cross -examine the plaintiffs.

(3.) The plaintiffs filed objections to the said applications and contended that the case was posted on 1 -10 -2010 for cross -examination of P.W. 1, the first defendant has failed to cross -examine P.W. 1. Even after recalling the said order on 29 -01 -2011, the defendants have failed to cross -examine P.W. 1 and P.W. 2. Hence, sought for dismissal of the said applications. The Trial Court after considering the matter in detail and taking into consideration various dates mentioned above, found that though sufficient opportunity has been given to the defendants to cross -examine P.W. 1 and P.W. 2, they have failed to cross -examine the plaintiffs. Hence, no ground is made out to reopen the case of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 once again and for recalling their evidence. Accordingly, rejected the said applications, by its order impugned in this writ petition. Being aggrieved by the said order, the first defendant filed the present writ petition.