![]() “This opportunity is being given to the husband subject to payment of Rs.50,000/- as costs to be paid to the wife within 2 weeks,” the court added. It added that no further opportunity shall be granted to either of the parties for cross examination. on May 17 and 18, adding that the cross examination shall be concluded on the said dates. ![]() Thus, the court ordered that the witnesses shall be produced before the Family Court on two continuous dates i.e. Thereafter, vide the impugned order dated 29th March, 2023 the husband’s evidence was also closed and the matter was fixed for final arguments,” the court said. “Insofar as the evidence of the husband is concerned, no evidence has been led and it was only on 16th March, 2023 that the wife’s evidence was closed and, the husband’s evidence and affidavits for RE were directed to be filed within one week. Noting that the Family Court had given sufficient opportunities to the husband to cross-examine his wife, the court said that it was not inclined to grant any further opportunity to him for cross-examination. Perusing various orders passed in the matter, the court noted that the Family Court had expressed a “complete exasperation” in the manner in which the proceedings were being prolonged by the husband. The petition seeking divorce was filed by the wife in 2013 and is still pending. The court was hearing the husband’s plea challenging an order of the Family Court passed on March 29 closing his right to cross-examine the wife. ![]() “Such cross-examination in matrimonial matters would be nothing more than sheer harassment,” the court said. Observing that cross-examination of a witness is an opportunity to the party to rebut the evidence given by such witness, Justice Prathiba M Singh took strong note of a matrimonial case where cross examination of wife by the husband continued before the Family Court “on dates after dates.” It erases the people and situations in which these ideas arose, fails to situate them in any context in which they can make sense.The Delhi High Court has observed that the cross-examination of a witness has to be concluded within a reasonable time limit and that it cannot continue “ad nauseam” in a never ending manner. The problem with this approach is the same problem as the island itself: it's not very lifelike. What types of knowledge should we be looking for? Why are they important? It offers a bulletin board of ideas, read in placid, monotone voices, a Pinterest approach to a theory of knowledge. It wants us to ask how we ought to situate our knowledge. A scientist here, a poet there, the Buddha up ahead. There are hidden videos and audio logs, each discussing some philosophical framework of the world in quotes and excerpts. The story, to the extent that it has one, is similarly hard to get a handle on. But The Witness offers no context within which to place its knowledge. The satisfaction of knowing, it suggests, is an end unto itself. Giulia Bondi, senior EU forests campaigner at Global Witness, said: Todays adoption of the law is a landmark moment in the fight against global deforestation - despite the worrying abstention of some Member States. Its best answer is the suggestion that you could do it all again if you wanted. The Witness challenges the very nature of reward structure in games. These beautiful byproducts are the best The Witness has to offer, and inevitably turn into a puzzle or a clue or are left by the wayside.Īnd what to do once the doors are unlocked? There's no answer to this question, and indeed Blow's magnum opus seems to hardly bother noticing you might even ask it. Riding on a boat, I saw the reflection of the mountain grow in the water. ![]() My favorite moments, the only ones I truly enjoyed, were the brief respites as I traveled from puzzle to puzzle.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |