JOHN FILIP PEREIRA Vs. ANTONIO DSILVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the Respondents. The learned Counsel for the Respondents has filed Vakalatnama for Respondents No.1a), 1b) and 2 and she undertakes to file Vakalatnama for Respondent No.1c).

(2.) RULE . Rule returnable forthwith.

(3.) THE Defendants in Regular Civil Suit No.200/92/C have filed the present Revision Application against the two Orders passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Margao . The Defendant No.1 (the present Petitioner No.1) is of 91 years of age and, therefore, he filed an application before the learned Civil Judge on 15 06 2001 requesting that a commissioner may be appointed for recording his evidence at his residence. On that application, on 30 06 2001, the learned Civil Judge directed to file medical evidence as well as Affidavit on the next date. Accordingly, the Advocate of the Defendant No.1 filed his own Affidavit and the medical certificate. The learned Civil Judge, by her Order dated 5 07 2001 rejected the application for appointment of commissioner. Thereafter, the matter came up again for recording evidence of the Defendant and the application for adjournment was filed by the Advocate for Defendant No.1 and the same was rejected by the learned Civil Judge on 19 07 2001. Being aggrieved by these two Orders, the present Revision Petition is filed.