TM HE HI4 CCU O ATA AT 3N T OE D\ ED TH. 179 DAY O APIL 1998 THE HOW BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N, NARAYAN IU C.R.P,NO.1289/1998 i-andria, 8/0 Anjanaiah, Token No.990, Conductor, K.S.r.C,, Kunigal Depot, Kunigal, (By Sri. K.V. Narasirhan, Adv, for Petr,) Sri, 9.R. Ranganath, /o H.. Ran’&crishna Rae, Heiper3, F ‘, ,r,o Funig (By Sri, MV Narasimhan, Adv, Per,’ 1s The Nedungadi B3nk Limited Banga 0 c Branc , Lalbagi Fort Road, 3angaiore560 004, —2— having its Head Office at robinson Road. Calicut reoresented by its Power of Attorney and Senior Manager P.T. Sashidharan, Major, ,.RESPONDET, (Coinnon in both the petitions) * ** Civil Revision Petitionis filed U/s 18 of the Small Causes Court Act against the Order dated 263,i998 passed in S.C,NO,1742/1997 &i7 51/97 on the file of the Judges Court of Small Causes, Eangalore City, Thts.Civil Revision Petioncoming on for ADMISSION t...his day, the Court made the folloving: ORDER C,RPi289 & 1290 of 1998 These revisions coming on for admission today, notice to respondent is dispensed with as unnecessary in view of the nature of the impugned order, The trial Court has reiected defendants (petitioner herein) application fried under Order 18 Rule 17 to recall PWi for further cross examination, in the memorandum , j , 3 of facts the learned counsel for the defendant has stated th.at certain quE.. stions could .ot be t to Pti-i in the cross examjnation by over sight and for want of material with him at the time of corss examination, Therefore, he requested the Court to recall PW-i. The trial court has rejected the request solely on the ground that the learned counsel for the defendant has not disclosed the proposed questions to cross examine PW—1, 2. It is true that the Advocate has not stated in detail what are the questions she would like to ask PW—1. However, it amounts to denial of the opportunity for the defendant to put questions to the defendant in the cross examination, In my opinion, the trial Judge has erred in rejecting his appiication Therefore, the revIsion is allowed, The trial court is directed to permit the defendant to cross examine PWl further on the next date of hearing, Sd/ U Tyby:GM $ Con C by: R by: As1staflt R18tt V Ugh Court of Krn 7 .. Ba1or 0 b