#no cross order

The Bombay High Court has ruled that litigants cannot be penalized with no-cross orders or closure of evidence due to their advocate’s absence, provided the non-appearance was not willful. This reinforces the right to be heard and prevents procedural injustice against clients who acted in good faith, setting a vital precedent for fair trial standards in civil litigation.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that defendants' inability to appear for cross-examination due to pandemic constraints cannot be grounds for shutting down their defence entirely. This reaffirms that natural justice under Article 14 and the principle of audi alteram partem require courts to accommodate legitimate disruptions, not penalize litigants for circumstances beyond their control.

Bombay HC reaffirms that cross-examination is an invaluable right under the Code of Civil Procedure, essential for a just determination of disputes. The court set aside a 'no-cross order' where an advocate's conflict denied the defendant this right, permitting cross-examination in two sessions with costs to balance fairness and efficiency.