LAWS(KAR)-2006-11-3

A N KRISHNA MURTHY Vs. S K SUKUMAR

Decided On November 18, 2006
A.N.KRISHNA MURTHY Appellant
V/S
S.K.SUKUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the defendant in O. S. No. 7940/91 before the City Civil Judge, Bangalore. The respondent is the plaintiff. In the suit, the Court directed both the parties to file the affidavits in lieu of examination - in - chief simultaneously. The defendant filed an application under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code seeking permission of the Court to cross - examine PW. 1 and after completion of the evidence of the plaintiff to file the affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief of the defendant after closure of the plaintiffs side. The Trial Court has rejected the application on 4-1-2003 by holding that in view of Order 18, Rule 4 of Civil Procedure code both the plaintiff and defendant have to file the affidavits of evidence simultaneously and thereafter the Court has to take up the matter of cross-examination of the plaintiff and his witnesses and the defendant and his witnesses respectively. Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed.

(2.) I have heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(3.) ACCORDING to the Learned Counsel for the petitioner, the Trial Court has committed an error in calling upon the plaintiff and the defendant simultaneously to file the affidavits in lieu of examination-in-chief and thereafter submit themselves to the cross-examination by the respective advocates. According to him the Trial Court has misdirected itself in not appreciating the provisions under Order 18, Rule 4 of Civil Procedure Code. According to him, the examination-in-chief of a defendant would be depending upon the evidence let-in by the plaintiff. Many a times the evidence of the defendant may not arise at all, if the defendant is able to secure proper admissions in the cross-examination of the plaintiff and his witnesses. According to him the word used under Order 18, Rule 4 of Civil procedure Code is the word 'witness' and not 'witnesses'. Therefore, he requests this Court to quash the order passed by the Trial Court. Order 18, Rule 4 of Civil Procedure Code reads as hereunder: