VASHRAM DAYA HARIJAN Vs. BIJAL DEVA HARIJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision petition filed under sec. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code by the petitioner who was original defendant No. 1 in civil suit No. 7 of 1966 filed by opponents Nos. 1 and 2 against the present petitioner and opponent No. 3 (Original defendant No. 2) in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division Sihor. The order passed by the trial Court below Ex. 25 is regarding the issue of summons to defendant No. 1 for giving evidence as a witness of the plaintiff.

(2.) Mr. Hathi learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner urged that the Court had no jurisdiction to examine the opposite party as a witness. This practice of examining the opposite party as a witness has been condemned by the Privy Council. There is also a circular issued by the Bombay High Court prior to the date of bifurcation of the bigger Bilingual Bombay State in this behalf There is also a decision of the Bombay High Court condemning such practice and that decision has also been given prior to the date of bifurcation of the bigger Bilingual Bombay State. In spite of it the learned trial Judge has passed the impugned order and issued summons to examine defendant No. 1 as a witness of the plaintiff. This order should therefore be set aside by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under sec. 115 of the Civil Procedure Code.

(3.) It is true that the privy council in Lal Kunwar v. Chiranji Lal 32 Indian Law Reports (Allahabad) 104 has observed:-