BRAHMAM P Vs. G SWAMINAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order passed on an application filed under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code in I.A.No. 929 of 1994 in O.S.No. 279 of 1987 on the file of the District Munsif, Srungavarapukota, dt. 28-12-94 for recalling P.W.2 is the subject matter of challenge in this C.R.P.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner states that on an application filed by the respondent under Order 18 Rule 17 of C.P.C to recall P.W.2 for further cross-examination, the lower Court erroneously allowed the application though resisted by the petitioner herein. It is stated, the provisions contemplated under Order 18 Rule 17 of C.P.C only invests powers in the Court to suo motu recall the witness for questioning and it is not open to the parties to file an application seeking recalling of a witness for further cross-examination.

(3.) In view of this submission, it is to be examined whether the provisions contemplated under Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC are to be construed to say that it is only the Court which is competent to recall the witness suo motu and not otherwise. Order 18 Rule 17 of CPC reads as under :