Mandatory textile export qualifiers distinguish flame-retardant fabrics from other listed fabrics for automated identification under the textiles ince...
Personal liberty safeguards restrict arrest after court-directed GST appearance, requiring interim release where authorities overreach pending proceed...
Alternative statutory remedy and delay bar GST writ challenges despite pending rectification, while distinct subject matter permits parallel proceedin...
SC held that under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC and Section 165 of Evidence Act, the power to recall a witness is exclusively within the court's discretion. The court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 CPC to permit a party to recall a witness if circumstances warrant, but such recall is not an automatic right. Cross-examination of a recalled witness requires explicit court permission. The court's primary objective is to discover or obtain proper proof of relevant facts. The Special Leave Petitions were consequently dismissed, affirming the court's broad discretionary power in witness examination.
SC held that under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC and Section 165 of Evidence Act, the power to recall a witness is exclusively within the court's discretion. The court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 CPC to permit a party to recall a witness if circumstances warrant, but such recall is not an automatic right. Cross-examination of a recalled witness requires explicit court permission. The court's primary objective is to discover or obtain proper proof of relevant facts. The Special Leave Petitions were consequently dismissed, affirming the court's broad discretionary power in witness examination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.