KAILASA BHOOMIAH Vs. KAILASA EASHWARALINGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only question in this revision is, whether the list of witnesses filed under Order 16 Rule 1 CPC, can be accepted even if it is so filed beyond 15 days after framing of the issues in the suit.

(2.) In this revision, the application fifed to condone the delay in filing the list of witnesses was dismissed by the lower Court on the ground that it was filed after 10 months of framing of issues. The ground pleaded for delay by the petitioner is that he is old age and not keeping good health. Order 16 rule 1 to the extent relevant and rule 1A are as under:

(3.) Though sub-rule (1) of Rule I gives an impression that filing of the list- witnesses within 15 days from the date of settlement of issues is mandatory, but when it is read with sub-rule (3) the impression gets faded because it permits calling of a person as a witness to the Court though his name is not included in the list of witnesses, of course for sufficient reasons to be recorded. Thus, there is sufficient power vested in the Court to condone the non-mention of a name in the list of witnesses. Equally, rule IA permits any party to the suit to bring any witness to give evidence without applying for summons A comprehensive reading of rule I and IA leads to an interpretation that filing of list of witnesses within 15 days is not mandatory and the party can file the same even beyond that but reasons to be explained for the delay. This interpretation is also one leading towards the ultimate object of the ends of justice bsing met with