RAMCHANDRA SINDHI Vs. MAHILA GODAWARI MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner/defendants No. 2 to 4 have challenged the order dated 28.09.2012 passed by the trial court, whereby their application Annexure P-6 is rejected by the court below.

(2.) IN a suit for eviction and recovery of rent, the defendant/petitioner filed application (Annexure P-6) stating that the defendants No. 2 to 4 have filed affidavit of their witness Ravi Kumar and the plaintiff has already cross-examined on the said witness. In para 4 of the said affidavit a particular statement was made by the said witness. It is stated in Annexure P-6 that during the course of cross-examination of the said defence witness by the plaintiff it has come that "kirayanama" dated 17.06.1995 was written by the Ramchandra. It is further submitted in the said application that this fact came to the notice of defendant No. 1 only after recording of the said statement and there was no question of making such statement/disclosing the said fact and therefore, in the cross-examination there are contradiction and anomalies.

(3.) IN the considered opinion of this Court, the defendant No. 1 if at all intended to cross-examination the said witness Ravi Kumar, such a request should have been made on the same date when he deposed the said statement which is said to be contradictory in nature. Even otherwise if the statement is contradictory in nature, the petitioner can very well bring the said contradiction to the notice of the trial court during the course of arguments. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly admits that the said course is very much available to the petitioner but he had a right to cross- examine the said witness in view of his contradictory statements.