EJUM KARBAK Vs. RAYOM JINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. Kato, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. T. Jini, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

(2.) This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the defendant/petitioner herein, praying for setting aside and quashing of the impugned order, dated 16.11.2017, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), West Siang District, Aalo in Title Suit No.02/16, whereby the petitioner was denied the opportunity of cross-examination of his witnesses and the learned Court below refused to summon his witnesses, who have declined to appear before the Court without receipt of summons from its end.

(3.) The defendant/petitioner has contended that in the aforesaid suit relating to land dispute with the plaintiff/respondent herein, which incepted in the year 2001, has been constantly litigating by them over their rights on the suit land in different forums, inclusive 02(two) batches of writ petitions (since disposed of), being WP(C)No.1069(AP)2001 and WP(C)No.3622(AP)2001 [renumbered as WP(C)No.815(AP)2001] and finally their dispute landed in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), West Siang District, Aalo where the suit was registered as T.S. No.02/2016. In the aforesaid suit, after the evidence for the plaintiff was closed, the defendant/petitioner submitted the depositions of 03(three) witnesses in evidence in-chief, on affidavit and accordingly, he was subjected to cross examination, but, 02(two) of his witnesses remained to be cross examined. In the meantime, the defendant/petitioner suffered serious health deterioration (diagnosed cancer) and could not pursue the case personally and on the other hand, the remaining 02(two) witnesses of the defendant have also refused to appear before the learned Court below without receipt of summons from the Court. Therefore, the defendant/petitioner filed an application being numbered 854/2017, on 18.10.2017, praying for adjournment for a period of 06(six) months, as he was undergoing medical treatment in Delhi, which period was required for his recovery from illness. The defendant/petitioner filed another application, being numbered 857/2017, on 16.11.2017, praying for issuance of summons to his witnesses. However, the learned Court below, after hearing both the sides, rejected the aforesaid prayers, vide the impugned order, dated 16.11.2017, and closed the evidence of the defendant's side.