QAMAR BEGUM Vs. HABEEBUNNISA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case presents another illustration, as to how unsafe, it is to entrust the functions of the Court, to an Advocate-Commissioner, indiscriminately.

(2.) The petitioners filed O.S.No.278 of 2001 in the Court of XII Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Secunderabad, against the respondent. The trial of the suit commenced. The recording of the evidence on behalf of the respondent, is in progress. She filed her affidavit in lieu of chief-examination. The trial Court had appointed an Advocate-Commissioner, to record her cross-examination. The Advocate-Commissioner, submitted a report, dated 17.04.2006, stating that the respondent, as DW.1, has stated that she did not sign upon Exs.A.3 and A.4 and that she has gone to the extent of denying her signatures on the vakalat and the written statement also. He further complained that the respondent refused to sign the depositions and offered to put thumb impression on it.

(3.) The trial Court took note of these developments and passed a detailed order, dated 26.07.2006. It ultimately directed the learned counsel for the respondent in the trial Court, to file an affidavit as to whether the vakalat and written statement presented by him, were signed by the respondent or not. The respondent was also directed to appear before the Court on 07.08.2006. In compliance with the directions issued by the trial Court, the counsel filed an affidavit stating that vakalat and written statement were signed by the respondent. The respondent appeared before the Court and stated that she signed on them. Her signatures were taken on a white paper in the open Court. The Court directed the continuation of trial and posted the matter to 24.08.2006. The petitioners challenge the order, dated 26.07.2006.