The court granted the recall of PW3 for further cross-examination as new facts regarding his accreditation are material to the legality of evidence and essential for a just decision.
The application to recall the plaintiff's witness was refused because the document sought to be introduced was already in the plaintiff's possession before the case was closed, the move was aimed at filling gaps in the plaintiff's case, and allowing it would prejudice the defendant; the court's discretion to recall a witness must be exercised judiciously and not to permit abuse of process or prejudice.
The court held that recalling PW1 for further examination in chief to tender documents annexed to the plaint but not previously admitted is justified due to inadvertent omission and unforeseen circumstances. The court found that the applicant acted promptly after joining the new administrator and that the respondents would not be prejudiced as the defence case had not commenced and the documents were known to them. The court also held that the application to add another witness could not be granted due to failure to cite the specific order of the CPC and that sections 68(e) and 95 of the CPC…
The High Court dismissed an application to recall the 1st respondent for further cross-examination, holding that the witness had already been examined on the relevant matters.
The High Court dismissed a revision application challenging bias concerns and refusal to recall a defence witness, holding the motion was incompetent and unsupported.
High Court dismissed a criminal revision application challenging alleged magistrate bias and refusal to recall a defence witness, holding the application was a nullity.