logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 1170 print Preview print Next print
Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras
Case No : A. No. 5731 of 2025 & A. No. 5732 of 2025 In CS. No. 467 of 2015
Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE R.N. MANJULA
Parties : Sureshkumar Jain & Others Versus Uttamchand Jain & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Applicants: S. Sadasharam, Advocate. For the Respondents: V. Anand, Advocate.
Date of Judgment : 23-01-2026
Head Note :-
Subject
Summary :-
Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:



Catch Words:
- cross‑examination
- evidence
- costs

Summary:
The applicants (defendants 2, 4, 5 & 6) sought to reopen and continue the cross‑examination of PW‑1 in Civil Suit No. 467 of 2015. The plaintiff objected, arguing the defendants had not shown a genuine interest in completing the cross‑examination timely. The court noted that despite numerous hearings, PW‑1’s cross‑examination remained incomplete and the defendants had repeatedly delayed. Balancing the need for a fair trial against the hardship caused to PW‑1, the court permitted the applications but imposed costs on the defendants. A sum of Rs. 15,000 was ordered as costs, with Rs. 10,000 payable to the plaintiff and Rs. 5,000 to the Advocate’s Law Clerk Association. Compliance was to be reported on 27 January 2026.

Conclusion:
Petition Allowed
Judgment :-

(A No. 5731 of 2025

Prayer: Application is filed to reopen the evidence of PW-1 for Continuation Cross Examination in C.S.No.467 of 2015 be reopened

A No. 5732 of 2025

Application is filed to recall PW-1 for continuation of Cross Examination of PW-1 in C.S.No.467 of 2015.)

Common Order:

1. These applications have been filed by the applicants / contesting defendants 2, 4, 5 & 6 to reopen the evidence of P.W.1 and to recall the evidence of P.W.1 for continuation of cross-examination in the above suit.

2. The learned counsel for the first respondent / plaintiff vehemently objected to allow these applications stating that the defendants did not evince proper interest to complete the cross-examination of P.W.1 on time.

A No. 5731 of 2025

3. The records would show that P.W.1 had been present on several occasions but the contesting defendants did not make use of the opportunity to cross-examine P.W.1. In fact, on 24.10.2025, this Court has passed an order stating that the matter has been listed at least for more than 100 hearings, however, the cross-examination of P.W.1 has not been completed so far. The date has been fixed on 03.11.2025 to continue cross-examination of P.W.1. Now once again the application to recall P.W.1 has been filed without making use of the last opportunity granted by virtue of the order of this Court dated 24.10.2025. Thereafter, on 03.11.2025 the evidence was closed and the matter has been posted for further evidence.

4. Since the applicants / defendants 2, 4, 5 & 6 have caused hardship to P.W.1 by their repeated delay making tactics and now have filed these applications, I feel some balance should struck between granting a fair opportunity and to compensate the parties who have suffered hardship.

5. As the completion of cross-examination of P.W.1 can better help the case to be disposed on merits and at the same time P.W.1 cannot be allowed to suffer hardship for the failure on the part of the contesting defendants, I feel these applications can be allowed on costs.

A No. 5731 of 2025

6. Accordingly, these applications are allowed on payment of a sum of Rs.15,000/- as costs to the applicants, out which Rs.10,000/- is payable to the first respondent / plaintiff and Rs.5,000/- is payable to the Advocate’s Law Clerk Association, Madras High Court, forthwith.

7. The matter is ordered to be listed on 27.01.2026, for reporting compliance.
 
  CDJLawJournal