Telangana High Court
CRP/5929/2017 of MANDADAPU VENKATA RAMANA, KRISHNA DIST Vs MANDADAPU SIRISHA, KRISHNA DIST on 29 December 2017
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN Civil Revision Petition Nos.5724 and 5929 of 2017 COMMON ORDER: Aggrieved by the dismissal of his applications for reopening and recalling PW.1 for further cross-examination, the respondent in a petition for restitution of conjugal rights has come up with the above
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN Civil Revision Petition Nos.5724 and 5929 of 2017
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
COMMON ORDER:
Aggrieved by the dismissal of his applications for reopening and recalling PW.1 for further cross-examination, the respondent in a petition for restitution of conjugal rights has come up with the above revisions.
2. Heard Mr. Palle Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the revision petitioner.
3. As rightly observed by the trial Court, the petitioner earlier filed two applications in I.A.Nos.554 and 555 of 2017 for reopening and for recalling PW.1 for further cross-examination. Those two applications were dismissed on merits on 12-07-2017. The orders were not challenged.
4. Subsequently, when the Original Petition for restitution was posted for trial, the petitioner filed fresh applications in I.A.Nos.780 and 781 of 2017 for reopening and for recalling PW.1. Therefore, the trial Court was right in dismissing the present applications. Hence, the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed as devoid of merits.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
________________________
V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J
Date: 29-12-2017
Ksn