R. KRISHNAMURTHY Vs. R. BABU AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order allowing to eschew the evidence of D.W.1 and to close the evidence of third defendant with liberty to third defendant to get transpose himself as one of the plaintiffs.

(2.) Originally, the suit for specific performance was filed by one Devaraj against Rajammal. During the life time of the said defendant Rajammal, one of her sons deposed as P.W.2 supporting the case of the plaintiff. On a later date, after the death of the defendant said Rajammal, the legal heirs including the third defendant were brought on record. The third defendant engaged one Mr.A.Palaniappan, Advocate and filed proof affidavit as D.W.1 supporting the case of the plaintiff. The other legal heirs of Rajammal who are contesting the case against the plaintiff, objected the move and filed a petition to eschew the evidence of D.W.1. Having deposed as P.W.2 supporting the case of plaintiff he cannot depose as defendants side witness. The trial Court has allowed the application and also has given liberty to the third defendant to transpose himself as co-plaintiff. Against this order, the third defendant prefers the above revision.

(3.) It is an admitted case that the third defendant who is the legal heir of the defendant has already deposed on the side of the plaintiff P.W.2. He is not entitled to depose on the side of the defendant either supporting the case of the defendant or that of the plaintiff. The petitioner has already let in evidence as P.W.2 and cross examined or will be cross examined by the adverse parties. The attempt to call him as a witness of the adverse parties will run counter to their case and the plaintiff cannot be allowed to achieve his object by introducing P.W.2 to depose also as D.W.1. Such an attempt is opposed to law and against interest of justice.