KAMAL KUMAR MODI Vs. KRISHAN SAIGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is facing eviction suit No.896/98. In this, respondent (plaintiff) filed an application under Order 18 Rule 4 for filing the examination-in-chief of the witnesses on affidavit which was allowed by impugned order dated 21.10.2002 providing thus:-

(2.) The appellant (defendant) feels aggrieved of this and has filed this appeal to assail the order. According to his counsel Mr.Endlaw, appellant could not be called upon to file the examination-in-chief of his witnesses on affidavit prior to the cross-examination of plaintiff's witnesses. This would run counter to the scheme of Order 18 Rule 1 which provided for the plaintiff's right to begin first and then that of the Defendant and would also deprive him of a right to depose/elucidate any matter or issue requiring clarification or arising out of the cross-examination of the plaintiff's witness. He has sought support for this from a Madras High Court judgment in Mohamed Hussain Vs. Chartered Bank AIR 1965 Madras 266.

(3.) The impugned order requiring parties to submit the examination-in-chief of their witnesses on an affidavit has been passed pursuant to the latest amendment in the Civil Procedure Code substituting Rule 4 in Order 18. This Rule reads thus:-