Satyanarayana Vs. Kotha China Veerabhadrarao  INSC 1320 (29 July 2009)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5065 OF 2009 [Arising out of SLP(C) No.
2626/2007] PENDYALA SATYANARAYANA ... APPELLANT(S) :VERSUS:
the questions which was raised before the High Court by way of a substantial
question of law in a second appeal by the appellant was as to whether the
expert evidence should have not been taken into consideration by the First Appellate
Court, only in terms of a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Renu
Devi Kedia v. Seetha Devi, 2004 (6) A.L.T. 429. The question, in our opinion,
should have been considered by the High Court keeping in view the provisions of
Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act in the light of several decisions
view of the fact that the expert's testimony before the Court should not be
shaken despite lengthy cross-examination, we are of the opinion that the High
Court ought not to have dismissed the second appeal in limine. We, therefore,
set aside the judgment of the High Court and remit the matter back to it for
consideration afresh after framing appropriate question of law.
appeal is disposed of with the aforementioned direction.
.......................J (S.B. SINHA)
.......................J (DEEPAK VERMA)
JULY 30, 2009.
Pages: 1 2 3