HARI CHARAN DAS Vs. BINAPANI DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -The present revision is directed at the instance of the defendant/petitioner, against the impugned order No. 121 dated 19. 2.91 passed by the Additional Munsif, Tamluk in T.S. No. 61 of 1990 allowing the plaintiff to depose after the evidence of PWS, 1, 2 and 3, on commission.

(2.) The question mooted in this case for decision is whether the plaintiff in the order of examination of witnesses can be examined after examination of other witnesses for the plaintiff.

(3.) In the plaintiff's suit for eviction of the defendant from the suit promises on the ground of default and reasonable requirement for establishing a cycle-shop for the plaintiff's son, three witnesses of the plaintiff were examined on 10-12-90, 12-12-90. Of the three PWS, PW-1 is the son of the plaintiff and a power of attorney holder of the plaintiff and he deposed on, behalf of the plaintiff on the strength of that power of attorney. In his examination-in-chief, he stated on oath that the plaintiff would not depose in the case.