VADDE SANPANGI SRINIVAULU Vs. BECCANI LAKSHMI REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 3-3-1997 passed by the learned District Munsif, Banaganapalle, in I.A.No.56/97 in O.S.No. 141 of 1995, permitting the respondent to examine P.W.3 as witness on behalf of the respondent under Order XVIII Rule 17 of Section 451 C.P.C.

(2.) In the suit filed by the petitioner he examined P.W.3 and was cross-examined by the respondent. Subsequently, the respondent filed an application I.A.No.414/96 to recall the witness for further cross-examination. The said application was dismissed on merits. The respondent having not filed any revision, the said order has become final. Now, when the case was posted for the evidence of the respondent-defendant, the respondent filed the present application under Order X VIII Rule 17 of C.P.C. seeking permission to examine P.W.3 as a witness on his side. The said application was, however, allowed. Aggrieved by the same, this Civil Revision Petition is filed.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that Order XVIII Rule 17 C.P.C. docs not permit the defendant-respondent to examine the petitioner's witness as the witness of the respondent. The said provision only applies for recalling a witness already examined by one party or the other but not to examine the said witness as the witness ofthe other party. The learned Counsel for the respondent, however, submits that nowhere in the Court there is any such prohibition to examine one party's witness as other party's witness. In the absence of such provision, and in the interest of justice, the Court in its discretion is entitled to allow P.W.3 to examine as witness of the defendant-respondent.