B VENKAT RAM REDDY Vs. K SRINIVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the 1st defendant in O.S. No.41 of 2003 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge Wanaparthy. It was filed by Respondents 1 to 3 herein. Respondents 4, 5 and 6 are Defendants 2, 3 and 4. The suit was filed for the relief of recovery of a sum of Rs.6,50,000/-. The petitioner filed his written statement denying the liability. The trial of the suit commenced. The evidence of the plaintiffs' side was closed. So far as the defendants are concerned, the petitioner herein deposed as D.W.I. Though Respondents 4, 5 and 6 have filed their written statement, they have not chosen to depose as witnesses. The petitioner filed IA No.26 of 2005 under Order 16 Rule 1(3) CPC with a prayer to summon Respondents 4, 5 and 6 as witnesses. The application was resisted and ultimately through its order, dated 18-2-2005, the Trial Court dismissed the I.A. Hence, this civil revision petition.

(2.) Sri Venu Gopal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Submits that the necessity for the petitioner to file the I.A. arose on account of the fact that Respondents 4, 5 and 6, against whom the suit claim was made along with the petitioner, have colluded with the plaintiffs (Respondents 1 to 3) and obviously with a view to cover up the collusion, have desisted from deposing as witnesses. He submits that the summoning of Respondents 4 to 6 to depose as witnesses is necessary, so that the Court can appreciate the real facts.

(3.) The petitioner filed the IA. to summon Respondents 4, 5 and 6 as witnesses. It has come on record that the said respondents have filed written statement but have remained ex pane.