Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 504 (KAR)

RADHAKRISHNA BHAT v. RADHA HENGSU

2003-06-27

S.R.BANNURMATH

body2003
BANNURMATH, J. ( 1 ) THOUGH the matter is posted for admission, as both the sides are represented and agreed for disposal, the same is taken up for final disposal. ( 2 ) THE petition is filed challenging the order dated 05/02/2003passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr Dn,), Mangalore in O. S. No. 756/2001. ( 3 ) THE respondent herein has filed a suit for possession againstthe petitioner and his wife. During the course of the evidence,'the respondent entered into witness box to give evidence on her behalf, and who is also cross- examined on 13/01/2003. Thereafter, she made certain admissions. It appears the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has filed a memo to the effect that while giving the evidence P. W. 1 has not been able to answer the questions properly due to her old age, ill-health and light dumbness and as such prayed that the evidence already given by her may be expunged and she may be permitted to lead fresh evidence. By the impugned order, the learned Civil Judge has allowed the memo and ordered for expunging the evidence of P. W. 1 ( 4 ) THERE is no provision under the CPC or for that matter underany law as to the evidence already recorded can be expunged that too at the behest of party who has probably given different answer or admission especially in Cross-examination. In the present case P. W. 1 was examined and has also been cross-examined and it appears certain admissions have been obtained by the petitioner's counsel while cross-examining. Since the evidence has been completed, even if the answers are unpalatable to the party or her advocate, the evidence cannot be expunged that too when there being no provision for doing so and hence the impugned order passed for expunging the evidence already recorded by the learned civii Judge is totally illegal and without Jurisdiction. ( 5 ) IN view of the same, the impugned order is liable to bequashed and the same is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Court for further proceedings. The Trial Court is directed to restore the evidence of P. W. 1 and proceed further Petition is allowed. --- *** --- .