S.NIRMALA Vs. SHANTHI HARIKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the order dtd. 26/7/2024 passed in A.No.1912 of 2024 in C.S.No.252 of 1996 by the learned single Judge refusing to eschew the evidence of cross examination of DW1 by the 9th defendant in the suit.

(2.) The original plaintiff filed suit C.S.No.252 of 1996 for partition and mesne profits in respect of the properties left by E.K.Pattabirama Reddiar paternal grandfather of the plaintiff and great grandfather of the original 1st and 2nd defendants. The first defendant is the plaintiff's deceased brother's son and 2nd defendant is the plaintiff's deceased sister's daughter. After the demise of the original plaintiff and defendants, their legal heirs are brought on record.

(3.) The appellants are arrayed as defendants 3, 5 to 7 in C.S.No.252 of 1996. These appellants are the legal heirs of the deceased 1st defendant. In the suit, after the completion of the examination of the plaintiff-side witnesses, the 10th defendant was examined as DW1. He was cross- examined by the learned counsel for the appellants at first, and after that DW1 was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the 9th defendant.