(1.) 1977 JLJ 493) was dissented from. In the aforesiad Single Bench decision this Court has categorically held that O. 18 R. 3 C.P.C. gives the party beginning a right to elect one out of the two courses open to him and to proceed according to that elected course. In the present case it is clear that the plaintiff had not given any indication as to whether he was reserving right to lead evidence on any of the issues. Now, if he is allowed to do so, it would amount to allowing him to lead evidence twice on the same issues, whereas the scheme of O. 18 R. 3 C.P.C. is to allow deferment of production of evidence on some of the issues, burden of which does not lie on the party leading/beginning evidence. If the other side has no notice of such election, it may allow the party beginning the evidence to lead evidence on all issues and at the end of the evidence of the party beginning evidence, the party to lead evidence subsequently may be told at the right of rebuttal on certain issues is reserved. This is not fair and cannot be allowed. 1977 JLJ 493 relied on.