Cross exam. new allegations in evidence in chief of plaintiff.

Damayanti (Querist) 13 February 2016 This query is : Resolved
Cross Exam. New Allegations in Evidence in chief of plaintiff.

New allegations are ridden with half truth but are grave due to the half truth apparently.

Respondent first raises objection to those new allegation in exam in chief affidavit.

Court says. "Evidence pertaining to pleadings /framed issues only be read" in evidence even if affidavit contains new allegations.

Thereafter, Respondent goes ahead confronts petitioner as to those allegations and takes denial on record, but while asking those question the respondent has to first admit to the first half truth and then go for 'confession and avoidance'

New judge got appointed thereafter.

New Court passed judgment saying asking questions in cross on those new allegations caused to bind the respondent, hence judge can't ignore those allegations and can't call them "traveling beyond pleading" anymore.

Is it in contravention to

pleading - say - framing -burden - evidence flow of fact finding?

Respondent asked those question in view to weaken the testimony of plaintiff.

Even if plaintiff had pleaded those allegation right from beginning, respondent never had any discomfort in answering to those, but at least respondent would have got opportunity to answer them in its entirety.

Please advise.

Dr g balakrishnan Sir,

Doesn't that amount to a inserting new 'cause of action' or 'amendment to pleading' by the Petitioner but without giving opportunity to Respondent to reply?

Judge passed judgment soly on that point

our contention is that 'had the petitioner pleaded that allegation right in the beginning, respondent had no hesitation to respond to it in detail wherein he would have exposed the half truth of plaintiff (half truth is more dangerous than plain vanilla lie).

But this sudden new allegation not only surprised the Respondent but he was deprived to answer it properly.

Is it not a back door channel to amend the pleading also not giving opportunity to respond (against the principles of natural justice)

Plaintiff's hands were not tied to plead leave of new addition and then again going through the pleading - say - burden assignment exercise.

Whole procedural flow is bypassed here.

How to put it concise words?

Please advise.

Follow Query

Report Abuse

dr g balakrishnan (Expert) 13 February 2016
respondent once admits allegations his case fails soon thereafter once he admits, he should always deny the allegations against him and indeed stay put, if not he would fail

Damayanti (Querist) 13 February 2016
There is no blanket admission by Respondent but he is deprived to give his side of story.

dr g balakrishnan (Expert) 13 February 2016
might be. fact is per code, you have to move fresh original civil case with new facts contented by you.

Damayanti (Querist) 13 February 2016
Sorry, I wrote my query wrongly.

Doesn't that amount to a inserting new 'cause of action' or 'amendment to pleading' by the Petitioner but without giving opportunity to Respondent to reply?