ABDEALI ALI HUSSAIN SETHWALA Vs. ASGARALI TAHIRALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is hereby finally decided with the consent of both the parties because the question involved is short and because of that, the trial which is in progress should not be obstructed.

(2.) SHRI Jain submitted that the re-examination should be permitted only if there happens to be an ambiguity in the examination-in-chief or has been created in the cross examination. He submitted that in the present case there was no ambiguity and, therefore, the order passed by the trial court permitting re-examination of witness-Haidarali was incorrect and illegal. Shri Sharma submitted that if the petitioner has a grievance by the order of the court permitting re-examination of Haidarali, the petitioner is at liberty to cross-examine the said witness on that point.

(3.) THE trial court was examining the said witness, and therefore, the trial court was in best position to judge whether there was an ambiguity apparent in the evidence in view of the averments made by the rival parties in the said suit. That assessment has to be done by the trial court. Generally, such discretion used by the trial court should not be interfered with unless it is perverse and arbitrary. If such witness has been permitted to be re-examined, the adversary should be given an opportunity of cross-examining the said witness on that point.