Kavita Balu @ Balaso Pukle vs Shalan Balu @ Balaso Pukle 5 Advocate - Inamdar M.S. — 387/2023

Case Summary: RCS 387/2023 In this partition suit, the court rejected the defendants' application to recall and re-examine the plaintiff as a witness under CPC Order XVIII, Rule 18. The defendants claimed ambiguities existed in the plaintiff's pleadings, prayers, and evidence that required clarification, but failed to specifically identify these ambiguities or demonstrate how recalling the witness would affect the case outcome. The court held that the power to recall witnesses applies only to clear genuine ambiguities arising during examination, not to fill evidentiary gaps, and cannot be exercised merely as a general procedural step. Application dismissed with no order on costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.