AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.M. Shyam Prasad, J
The question for consideration is whether the petitioner, a respondent in a reference under Section 18 in L.A.C. No.10/2012 on the file of the Senior
Civil Judge and JMFC, Kudligi [for short, ‘the reference Court’] must be extended another opportunity to crossexamine PW.1. The learned
counsel for the petitioner and, Sri.Mahesh Wodeyar, the learned counsel who accepts notice for private respondents, are heard with their consent for
final disposal.
It transpires from the impugned order that the petitioner has not cross-examined the respondents’ witness PW.1 despite repeated opportunities,
and insofar as the cause shown for not cross-examining the witnesses on earlier occasions, the petitioner has offered no reason. However, in the
interest of justice and to enable effective adjudication without protraction, this Court must opine that the petitioner must have another opportunity to
cross-examine the witness as that would enable a decision on merits.
The learned counsel for the petitioner is categorical that if the witness is present on the next date of hearing before the reference Court, the witness
would be cross-examined on behalf of the petitioner. The learned counsels for the parties also submit that the reference is directed to be listed before
the reference Court on 21.02.2022.
Therefore, the petition is allowed and the reference Court’s impugned order is quashed. The petitioner is permitted to cross-examine PW.1 on the
next date of hearing if the witness is present. The petitioner shall also pay sum of Rs.15,000/- as cost to the witness on the next date of hearing.