Nivas Sainath vs Lena Elizabeth Nivas

Krishna S Dixit, J

The short grievance of the Petitioner-husband is as to he being recalled to the witness box for further cross-examination at the hands of Respondent-wife. Mr. Appaiah, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that there are three cases pending in the Family Court; on three or four times between the parties, his client has already been cross-examined; at least, as a concession to the shortness of human life, litigations should come to an end before long. The impugned order militates against this idea.

Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent – wife in his usual vehemence submits that umpteen number of times, his client was subjected to cross-examination at the hands of the petitioner, and after the evidence was closed, she was recalled to the witness box thrice with no objection whatsoever from her side. Since there are three cases pending, if one more opportunity is given to his client to further cross-examine the Petitioner, the heavens are not going to fall; after all, right to cross-examination is recognized as a valuable right from the days of Socrates. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the Writ Petition.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter subject to the condition that the Respondent may further cross-examine the Petitioner on the next date of hearing in the Trial Court and he may further cross-examine him on one more day; that thus, in all will be two days. If this last opportunity is not made use of, the impugned order stands voided.

Ordered accordingly and Writ Petition is disposed off.