M/S.Sana Estates India Pvt. Ltd vs J.Acheswar Rao
2022 Latest Caselaw 3232 Tel

        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY


      CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.1365 and 1387 of 2022


COMMON ORDER:

      C.R.P.No.1365 of 2022 is filed against the order dated 01.04.2022

passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, in I.A.No.183 of

2022 in O.S.No.5 of 2012, whereas C.R.P.No.1387 of 2022 is filed

against the order dated 01.04.2022 passed by the learned Senior Civil

Judge, Sangareddy, in I.A.No.184 of 2022 in O.S.No.5 of 2022.

      Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant has stated that the

respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit for cancellation of agreement of

sale dated 13.08.2009 and for perpetual injunction of the suit schedule

plot. Learned counsel has further stated that the cross-examination of

P.W.1 was not done thoroughly by the learned counsel on record, and

therefore, the petitioner has filed I.A.No.183 of 2022 seeking to recall

P.W.1 for the purpose of cross-examination on the point of Ex.A.1, and

I.A.No.184 of 2022 to reopen the case for further cross-examination of

P.W.1. The Court below, without properly appreciating the facts and

legal proposition of law, has dismissed both the I.As. Learned counsel

has further stated that no prejudice would be caused to the respondent

if P.W.1 is recalled and the case is reopened for the purpose of cross-

examination. Therefore, he has prayed this Court to pass any orders

including imposition of costs.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent has stated

that the cross-examination of P.W.1 was done on 19.11.2018 and the

present I.As were filed in February, 2022. That the present I.As were

filed with a mala fide intention and to fill up the lacunae in the cross-

examination of P.W.1. Therefore, the Court below has rightly

dismissed the I.As, and the impugned orders need no interference by

this Court and prayed to dismiss the Civil Revision Petitions.

A perusal of the impugned orders shows that the learned Judge,

while taking into consideration the fact that P.W.1 was cross-examined

on 19.11.2018, held that no cogent or convincing reasons were given by

the defendant to recall P.W.1 and reopen the case for further cross-

examination, and accordingly dismissed both the I.As.

When queried by this Court, the learned counsel for the

petitioner has stated that subsequent to the cross-examination of

P.W.1, no new material was placed on record by either of the parties,

which may have warranted the recalling of the plaintiff for the

purpose of further cross-examination. In the absence of any new

evidence, either oral or documentary, the I.As filed by the petitioner

can only be said to be for the purpose of filling up the lacunae in the

cross-examination of P.W.1, which was completed on 19.11.2018, and

the same is not permissible under law.

In Vadiraj Naggappa Vernekar v. Sharad Chand Prabhakar Gogate1,

the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a witness cannot be recalled for

filling up the lacunae in the cross-examination.

Having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the judgment referred to above and the facts and

circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any infirmity or

illegality in the impugned orders warranting any interference by this

Court.

The Civil Revision Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

_______________________ A. ABHISHEK REDDY, J Date: 01.07.2022 va

2009 (4) SCC 410