GAMPA SAI RAVI KIRAN Vs. BONDA RAMA LAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is filed against the order and decree, dated 10-02-2010, passed in I.A. No. 25 of 2010 in I.A. No. 915 of 2009 in O.S. No. 1561 of 2009 on the file of the learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam. Brief facts are that the petitioner herein filed O.S. No. 1561 of 2009 for permanent injunction restraining the respondents herein and their men from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property and for such other reliefs. Along with the said suit, he filed I.A. No. 915 of 2009 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC seeking ad-interim injunction against the respondents 1 to 4 and the Court below directed both parties to maintain status quo. Later, petitioner filed the present I.A. No. 25 of 2010 under Order XIX Rule 2 r/w Rule 52 CPC seeking to summon respondents 1 to 4 for the purpose of cross-examination in I.A. No. 915 of 2009. Respondents filed a counter-affidavit denying all the averments of the affidavit, stating that there is no necessity to cross-examine them as it is not permissible under law. However, the Court below dismissed the said application. Aggrieved thereby, the present revision is preferred by the petitioner.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Order XIX Rule 2 CPC, which confers powers on the Court to call for attendance of the party so as to enable him to give an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. He relied upon a decision reported in Ali Bin Aifan, In re. (1), 1983 AIR(AP) 114 wherein it was held as follows:

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents relied upon a decision reported in Shetty Chandra Shekar and others v. Neeti Ramulu and others (2), 2008 2 ALT 463, wherein at paragraph No. 9 it is held as follows: