MUTHUKARUPPAN ALIAS VELAYUTHAM Vs. SURESH ALIAS MUTHUKARUPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O. S. No. 623 of 1996 on the file of Additional District Munsif's Court . Tuticorin is the revision petitioner in both the revision petitions.

(2.) RESPONDENTS herein filed two applications in I. A. No. 10 and 11 of 1999 to reopen the case and to recall PWs. 1 and 2, who have already been examined, for further cross-examination. It is averred in the affidavit that when these witnesses were in the box, counsel has inadvertantly omitted to put some material questions and the omission was found out only when the present counsel studied the case for arguments. It is alleged that if the witnesses are not allowed to be cross examined further, they will be put to great hardships.

(3.) HOW is the power exercised" In U. K. Ghosh v. M/s. Voltas Ltd, AIR 1994 Ori 131, learned Judge held thus, 'whether a prayer to recall a witness would be accepted would depend on facts and circumstances of each case and the principle cannot be put in a strait-jacket formula. Presiding Officer with his judicial experience shall exercise the discretion with the ultimate aim that parties get full opportunity to present their cases and the court is able to adjudicate properly.'