SHAIK ABDUL RASOOL Vs. G LAKSHMI REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner filed OS No. 1198 of 2006 in the Court of the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa against respondent No. 1 herein for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. THEreafter, respondent No.1 got herself impleaded and made claim vis-a-vis the suit schedule property. Issues were framed and the trial of the suit commenced.

(2.) DURING the course of her evidence, respondent No.2 stated that the suit schedule property has accrued to her husband by way of exchange with Kadapa Zilla Parishad. In a way, she has projected independent title in respect of the property.

(3.) THE petitioner wanted the trial Court to examine the Chief Executive Officer of Kadapa Zilla Parishad as a witness, with reference to the records maintained by Zilla Parishad pertaining to the suit schedule property. He invoked Rules 6, 7 and 14 of Order 16 C.P.C. THE trial Court rejected the application on the ground that it cannot be compelled to examine a person as a Court witness, and it is always for the Court itself to take such steps, on its own accord.