VIJAY SINGH GUPTA Vs. AJIT SINGH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the legality and validity of the order passed by the Trial Court rejecting his application under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'the CPC') read with Ss. 137 and 138 of the Indian Evidence Act (For short 'the Act, 1872').

(2.) The petitioner is the defendant No.3 in the civil suit. The respondent No.1 Ajit Singh Gupta has preferred a suit for declaration that the judgment and decree dtd. 29/4/1989 in civil suit No.75-A/89 is void, illegal and without jurisdiction having been obtained by committing fraud as also for permanent injunction to restrain the decree holders from obtaining benefit and using the said judgment and decree in their favour. The present petitioner/defendant No.3 has filed his written statement and is contesting the suit. The petitioner has moved the subject application on 6/12/2012 (Annexure P-5) seeking permission to cross-examine the defendant No.4 on the ground that the defendant No.4 has accepted the plaint averments, therefore, his interest is adverse to the interest of the petitioner/defendant No.3 and, as such, he needs to be cross-examined. The plaintiff and the defendant No.4 objected to the application on submission that similar application was earlier rejected on 5/11/2012, therefore, the present similar application is not maintainable.

(3.) Placing reliance upon the decisions rendered in Union of India Vs. Bakhtawar Singh and another 1, and M/s. Ennen Castings (P) Ltd. Vs. M.M. Sundaresh and others 2 learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would argue that when the interest of 1 AIR 1978 Punjab &Haryana 321 2 AIR 2003 Karnataka 293 the present petitioner/defendant No.3 is in conflict with or adverse to the interest of another defendant, the petitioner is entitled to cross-examine the other defendant who has admitted the plaintiff's case.