SETHURAJAN Vs. RAJALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner/Defendant has filed the instant Civil Revision Petition as against the order dated 12.10.2009 in I.A. No. 436 of 2009 in O.S.No. 9 of 2007 passed by the Learned District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi. The Learned District Munsif, Thiruthuraipoondi while dismissing the interlocutory application No. 436 of 2009 in O.S. No. 9 of 2007 on 12.10.2009, has, among other things, observed that 'the attestor of the document is to be examined to prove the execution of the document. If the attestor is not available, then, only the Court can allow other witness and further stated that attestor's signature is to be identified by any of known members. SRO, Thiruthuraipoondi is not an attesting witness and not competent to give evidence'.

(2.) The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Defendant contends that the trial Court while dismissing I.A. No. 436 of 2009 has not assigned any valid and acceptable reasons and since it has exercised its jurisdiction in a irregular fashion. This Court has inherent powers to interfere with the same and allow the Civil Revision Petition to promote substantial cause of justice.

(3.) The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Defendant urges before this Court that the Will relied on by the Petitioner/Defendant relates to the year 1978 and no prejudice would be caused to any one by production of the Will dated 17.4.1978 from the Sub Registrar Office, Thiruthuraipoondi and indeed, minute details need not be gone at the stage of receiving the witness list as per Order 16 Rule 1(3) of Civil Procedure Code.