MAJOR SINGH Vs. PRITAM KAUR ETC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Major Singh has filed this revision petition against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge III Class, Ludhiana, dated June 3, 1976, by which his application filed under Order 18, Rules 2, 3 and 4, read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, for permission to produce Nahar Singh as a witness, was rejected.

(2.) The only contention raised before me by Mr. Chawla, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that on January 14, 1976, the evidence of the defendant could not be closed especially when process fee had been deposited for summoning Nahar Singh witness. It is also submitted by the learned counsel that Nahar Singh was not served and that the trial Court should have afforded another opportunity for producing Nahar Singh. This contention of the learned counsel is liable to be rejected on the short ground that no revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order of January 14, 1976, by which the evidence of the defendant was closed and he was not permitted to produce Nahar Singh. This revision petition, as earlier observed, has been filed against the order which was passed on the application which was filed on March 4, 1976, praying that Nahar Singh witness be allowed to be produced. It is conceded before me by Mr. Chawla that the provisions of rules 2, 3 and 4 of Order 18 have no applicability and that the application should be deemed to have been filed under the provisions of Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. The learned counsel cannot challenge at this stage the legality of the order passed on January 14, 1976, on the ground that the same had been passed in contravention of the provisions of rule 3 of Order 17. The learned Subordinate Judge has rightly rejected the application and I do not find any ground to interfere with the same in exercise of my revisional powers.

(3.) For the reasons recorded above, this revision petition is dismissed with costs. The office is directed to send intimation of this order immediately to the trial Court. The parties, through their learned counsel, have been directed to appear before the trial Court on August 4, 1977.