The Court, however, held,
“Given the fact that cross-examination of PW-1 commenced only at 12.15 p.m., the learned Civil Judge was, prima facie, not justified in rejecting the petitioner’s request for permission to continue cross-examination of PW-1 on the next date of hearing.”
It added that the factors which prompted the civil judge refuse the petitioner’s request for further opportunity to cross-examine PW-1 cannot be treated as relevant.
“All that the learned Civil Judge observes is that the plaintiff was 80 years of age and several irrelevant questions had been put to her,” the Court remarked.
Thus, the Court was of the view that in the interests of justice, the petitioner ought to be allowed permission to continue the cross-examination of PW-1 on the next date of hearing.
“The petitioner is directed to endeavour and make all efforts to conclude the cross- examination of PW-1 on the said date. No adjournment would be granted to the petitioner in that regard,” the Court ordered.
Source: Barandbench
