Bijay Jena
19 November 2013 at 19:59
I am not able to get the specified form 'z' which is required to mention the exhibits that are to be submitted in original in the court if anyone can please provide me a scanned copy of the form.
Ramesh Kumar Pandey
19 November 2013 at 19:27
What is the easiest way to evict the Tenants and How Much Time to evict them ?
Damayanti
19 November 2013 at 18:53
My question is
What is correct/settled position of law as to ‘introducing documents/exhibits while cross examining the opposite side’s witness (either the opposite party to suit or other witnesses of opposite side) ?
My belief is that ONLY the Respondent/Defendent (against whom the liability is alleged) in any original trial are protected from unfair 'surprises' (new documents/exhibits during cross) ................ BUT plaintiffs are NOT protected against any surprises, as plaintiffs are supposed to be aware of "facts of case and subject matter" and are expected "not to be surprised about their own grievances/contentions (alleged rights accrued).
The situation is as follows:
Plaintiff's evidence stage is going on …
Plaintiff has given Exam in chief.
Now, the current status is as follows:
§ Respondent is taking plaintiff's cross exam/confronting the Plaintiff in cross (i.e. plaintiff is being subjected to cross exam)
§ Respondent has a surprise document to expose 'vexacity of plaintiff'!!
§ I got only one case law so far of BOM HC (2011) which suggests 'plaintiff's mischief can be exposed' and there is NO need to publish ‘surprise’ document before hand else the plaintiff gets a clue as to what is comming!!!!
1. So Order 7 R 14, Order 8 R 1-A and Order 13 R 1, read together an exception is carved like Respondent is NOT using the abovesaid ‘surprise’ doc to support/prove Respondent’s plea but to demolish/disprove plaintiff's plea!!! and thus/hence there is no need to give notice /list of docs while filing WS vide Order 8 Rule 1-A, else the surprise element in cross examination would vanish. And it is as good as giving a list of 'likely questions in cross' in advance!!!!)
But in support of above I request some more legal expert opinion, and some more guidance from experts, and also SC/ BOM HC cases laws.
I have a few genuine doubts as well!!! as follows. Please comment on those. thanks in advance.
In regards to production of documents/list etc CPC provisions as ….
In Order 7 Rule 14, wording is as ‘…… plaintiff’s witnesses …….’
In Order 8 Rule 1-A, wording ALSO is ‘…… plaintiff’s witnesses …….’
(Both are referring to plaintiff’s witnesses)
In Order 13 Rule 1, wording is as ‘……witnesses of the other party ....’
(my question here is … what about ‘defendant’s witnesses’??? I thought initially there is a printing mistake in CPC bare act that I have, but it is not!!!!)
Thus, the Respondent wants to 'disprove' the plaintiff's version of facts and expose vexacity/mischief!
There is no such burden upon respondent, but respondent taking onus to do so. if plaintiff's version of 'facts' remain 'unproved' still it is sufficient.
Vide WS, the Respondent has not only explicitly denied "plaintiff's version of facts/incident" but also alleged a new "respondent's version of same facts/incidents" etc Whether Respondent's version of facts get proved or not is not a matter of concern (as there is no counter claim by respondent), if plaintiff's version of alleged facts get demolished, then there remains nothing in the case!
Please clarify my doubts as follows (I am confused after reading those case laws):
There is another BOM HC case law which says (as to O7 R14, O8 R 1-A & O13 R1):
“ …. there is distinction in the term witness and a party to the suit …”
“The party to the suit cannot be equated with the witness and cannot be confronted with a document by casting surprise upon him, particularly when the documents were not filed by the plaintiff along with the list of documents on which he is going to rely upon.”
Thanks
Arvind
19 November 2013 at 18:53
Sir, I am working in education institute as a security guard. The institute comes under ‘Autonomous Institute under the DIPP’ Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Govt of India. Now days we are facing a problem that to who is authorize for our salute, (A) Director of the institute (B)Head of Security Department(C)Security Coordinator (not security officer) (D)Center Heard of Campus (E)Asst. Administrative officer (F)Administrative officer (G)Secretary & Head General Administration.
Damayanti
19 November 2013 at 18:51
My question is
What is correct/settled position of law as to ‘introducing documents/exhibits while cross examining the opposite side’s witness (either the opposite party to suit or other witnesses of opposite side) ?
My belief is that ONLY the Respondent/Defendent (against whom the liability is alleged) in any original trial are protected from unfair 'surprises' (new documents/exhibits during cross) ................ BUT plaintiffs are NOT protected against any surprises, as plaintiffs are supposed to be aware of "facts of case and subject matter" and are expected "not to be surprised about their own grievances/contentions (alleged rights accrued).
The situation is as follows:
Plaintiff's evidence stage is going on …
Plaintiff has given Exam in chief.
Now, the current status is as follows:
§ Respondent is taking plaintiff's cross exam/confronting the Plaintiff in cross (i.e. plaintiff is being subjected to cross exam)
§ Respondent has a surprise document to expose 'vexacity of plaintiff'!!
§ I got only one case law so far of BOM HC (2011) which suggests 'plaintiff's mischief can be exposed' and there is NO need to publish ‘surprise’ document before hand else the plaintiff gets a clue as to what is comming!!!!
1. So Order 7 R 14, Order 8 R 1-A and Order 13 R 1, read together an exception is carved like Respondent is NOT using the abovesaid ‘surprise’ doc to support/prove Respondent’s plea but to demolish/disprove plaintiff's plea!!! and thus/hence there is no need to give notice /list of docs while filing WS vide Order 8 Rule 1-A, else the surprise element in cross examination would vanish. And it is as good as giving a list of 'likely questions in cross' in advance!!!!)
But in support of above I request some more legal expert opinion, and some more guidance from experts, and also SC/ BOM HC cases laws.
I have a few genuine doubts as well!!! as follows. Please comment on those. thanks in advance.
In regards to production of documents/list etc CPC provisions as ….
In Order 7 Rule 14, wording is as ‘…… plaintiff’s witnesses …….’
In Order 8 Rule 1-A, wording ALSO is ‘…… plaintiff’s witnesses …….’
(Both are referring to plaintiff’s witnesses)
In Order 13 Rule 1, wording is as ‘……witnesses of the other party ....’
(my question here is … what about ‘defendant’s witnesses’??? I thought initially there is a printing mistake in CPC bare act that I have, but it is not!!!!)
Thus, the Respondent wants to 'disprove' the plaintiff's version of facts and expose vexacity/mischief!
There is no such burden upon respondent, but respondent taking onus to do so. if plaintiff's version of 'facts' remain 'unproved' still it is sufficient.
Vide WS, the Respondent has not only explicitly denied "plaintiff's version of facts/incident" but also alleged a new "respondent's version of same facts/incidents" etc Whether Respondent's version of facts get proved or not is not a matter of concern (as there is no counter claim by respondent), if plaintiff's version of alleged facts get demolished, then there remains nothing in the case!
Please clarify my doubts as follows (I am confused after reading those case laws):
There is another BOM HC case law which says (as to O7 R14, O8 R 1-A & O13 R1):
“ …. there is distinction in the term witness and a party to the suit …”
“The party to the suit cannot be equated with the witness and cannot be confronted with a document by casting surprise upon him, particularly when the documents were not filed by the plaintiff along with the list of documents on which he is going to rely upon.”
Thanks
Nikunj
19 November 2013 at 18:34
Sir, I have give a chq. of Rs.7.5 lacs to Mr. A for purchase of house but afterwards we find that there is some family problems are there then we said we want to cancel the deal. Then he gave us 7.5 lacs which was return in mar.13 then after he give me promises that he will pay the money at the earliest but till date he has not paid me the money and he was run away from his house also. can you guide me what is legal procedure so that i can get back my money from the cheaters.
Regards Nikunj
subhankar
19 November 2013 at 18:17
Sir,
I false case was regd under 420, I got B report frm 1st local Police then after court further enquiry then Dy.Sp also gave B report in 2012. Complainant absent for consecutive 7 hearing. i didnot got any summons frm court.
Matter is in 2011 i took gold loan frm muthoot fincorp after proper checking i was advanced loan, but i could not pay any instalments. in oct 2011 the br. mgr lodged a FIR against me stating that i gav duplicate gold, later after investication i was given cleareance frm the police. the said Br. Mgr left the Co. the matter is still pending.
i was suggested by present lawyer to file complaint in Distt. consumer forum, i hav filed the same. 2 hearing opp. party didnot come.
Now i came to know that if any case is pending the other court will not take.
Plz Plz advice how to proceed.
regards
subhankar chakravarty
nitin
19 November 2013 at 18:01
Hi,
I own a plot allotted by HUDA in Faridabad. I am unaware of various formalities to be performed for the plot and successful registration. Please advise on various steps to be followed and sequence. For example, allotment, possession, registration, conveyance deed, construction, land marking etc.
Thanks
Nitin Kumar
PRADEEP KUMAR MISHRA
19 November 2013 at 17:55
Respected all,
may any body please advise, whether a fresh certificate of incorporation is necessary to be obtained on amalgamation of two or more company.
further, when the scheme of amalgamation will come in to effect after the order is passed by the High Court on acceptance of the scheme?
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Suicide attempt
DEAR SIR/MADAM,
GOT MARRIED IN 1997.
TWO CHILDREN.
10 YEARS BACK MY WIFE ATTEMPTED FOR SUICIDE FOE A SILLY REASON.
ACCORDING TO HER SHE HAD ATTEMPTED ONCE IN HER COLLEGE DAYS.
NOW ALL HER FAMILY MEMBERS ARE DENYING THAT.
INSTEAD OF COUNSELLING HER THEY ARE IN DENIAL MODE.
FURTHER THEY ARE INFLUENCING HER MIND AGAINST ME AND MY FAMILY MEMBERS.
NOW SHE IS VERY MUCH FRIGHTENED AND BEHAVING VERY ERRATICALLY
KINDLY GUIDE ME