DEUS REVOLNATA PANCHISTA Vs. BHAURAO VITHAL GHAISAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD rival parties.

(2.) THIS petition is directed against the Order dated 10. 11. 2005 engrafted on the say filed in Regular Civil Suit No. 54/1991, passed by the Civil Judge Jr. Div. , Canacona, I/c Sanguem whereby the cross examination of D. W. 5 was closed by the trial Court and the application seeking to recall that witness moved by the petitioner came to be dismissed.

(3.) HAVING heard rival parties and examined the affidavit filed by the Advocate for the petitioners in the trial Court, sufficient cause is made out by the petitioners to recall the witness in question. As a matter of fact, it was expected on the part of the trial Court itself to grant opportunity to the petitioners to cross-examine D. W. 5. The trial Court was expected to consider the reason disclosed by the Advocate appearing for the petitioners, in its proper perspective. Had the trial Court exercised discretion properly, the litigation before this court could have been avoided.