KURUVILLA CHANDY Vs. HASSAN BAVA RAWTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit of a pauper, which had reached the trial stage, was dismissed, but, on a subsequent motion under 0. 9 R. 9 CPC. , was restored. THE defendant seeks in this revision to get that order reversed and thus get rid of the suit altogether. I am not disposed to agree because there are no grounds made out.

(2.) A commission had been issued for taking evidence in the case and to report to the Court together with the depositions recorded. On 5101967 the case came up for hearing when it was adjourned to 16101967 to await the report of the commissioner. On that date, the commissioner reported that he had not been able to examine the witnesses and therefore he was not in a position to return the commission-warrant duly executed. Thereupon, the Court dismissed the suit. However, when an application was made under 0. 9 Rule. 9 cpc. on the basis that the dismissal of the suit was under 0. 17 R. 2, CPC. the court was inclined to relent and "to grant him an opportunity" to prosecute the suit "subject to the conditions that he will be given only one opportunity alone for examining his witnesses and that he should also see that his examination is completed within 10 days from the date of restoration. He should also pay D. C. Rs. 25/-to the other side for the additional trouble caused to the defendant". Not K) days, but 10 months have passed since thanks to the revision petition and the stay granted therein.

(3.) I therefore dismiss the revision petition. The lower court has stated that the various averments made in the affidavit of the plaintiff are false and bearing that in mind I disallow him costs in this case. Dismissed.