Right of plaintiff to cross examine the defendant himself

case has a procedure to follow and the party will be cross-examined when first chief-examination is done. under section 313 of CRPC accused is cross-examined.

It is right of the plaintiff to cross-examine the defendant when the defendant enters witness box for deposition.

Ms, Nitika Jain,

The query of the author (plaintiff) pertains to a civil suit where plaintiff wants to know plaintiff's right to cross-examine the defendant, where provision of Section 313 Cr PC do not attract. 

Thanks & Best wishes

yes the plaintiff can ...I do stand with Expert Vashista ji points.

The plaintiff can examine the opposite party only if he is appearing in person. He can not if he has appointed an advocate to appear for him. 

plaintiff has right to cross examine any person who testified under the oath to support the claim of the defendants. But of the plaintiff has already appointed attorney the cross examination cannot be conducted by him in person.

Yes, in a civil proceeding, the party there to is entitled to cross-examine the witness if he is appearing in person. However, if an advocate is engaged, only the advocate can.

Thanks everyone,

I understand.  

In this case lawyer is appointed. Still if there is any provision in the law to get the permission of the court to cross examine the defendant for at least one portion in the presence of the lawyer. Rest can be done by the appointed lawyer. 

Thanks once again to clarify.

Thankyou, DR. J C vashista for correcting me and letting know the right information.
I am sorry for my wrong information above.

According to Order 3 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908:-

"Appearances, etc., may be in person, by recognised agent or by pleader

 any appearance, application or act in or to any Court, required or authorised by law to be made or done by a party in such Court, may, except where otherwise expressly provided by any law for the time being in force, be made or done by the party in person, or by his recognized agent, or by a pleader appearing, applying or acting, as the case may be, on his behalf:

Provide that any such appearance shall, if the Court so directs, be made by the party in person.”

So, the appearance of a person without a pleader is a complete discretion of court. The layman who want to fight his own case must satisfy the Court first that he has proper knowledge of the procedural law, drafting and other Laws and secondly that the Court do not have to waste time in every step of the way to make him understand the laws as huge cases are pending. There will be no scope of excuse that the layman was ignorant of any law.

Dear Ms Nitika,

You will appreciate the fact that we are learning every stage every day in every case, where there is no limit of learning. and no "cause" for saying sorry.

Best wishes

Originally posted by : VIPIN RANA
	According to Order 3 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code 1908:- "Appearances, etc., may be in person, by recognised agent or by pleader  any appearance, application or act in or to any Court, required or authorised by law to be made or done by a party in such Court, may, except where otherwise expressly provided by any law for the time being in force, be made or done by the party in person, or by his recognized agent, or by a pleader appearing, applying or acting, as the case may be, on his behalf: Provide that any such appearance shall, if the Court so directs, be made by the party in person.” So, the appearance of a person without a pleader is a complete discretion of court. The layman who want to fight his own case must satisfy the Court first that he has proper knowledge of the procedural law, drafting and other Laws and secondly that the Court do not have to waste time in every step of the way to make him understand the laws as huge cases are pending. There will be no scope of excuse that the layman was ignorant of any law.

The interpretation, as underlined, is an overreach of the provisions of the CPC.