DEVI SAHAI Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEVI Sahai, Plaintiff, has approached this Court in a revision petition filed against the order dated February 8, 1988 of the Additional Senior Sub Judge, Narnaul, declining to allow him to appear as his own witness. Devi Sahai filed a suit for the grant of permanent injunction restraining the Municipal Committee, Narnaul, from demolishing the super structure raised by the Plaintiff who claims to be the owner in possession thereof. The Plaintiff led his evidence and closed the same. However, he forgot to appear himself as his own witness. On that account, an application was filed that he should be permitted to appear as his own witness which has been declined by the trial Court.

(2.) NO doubt Order 18 Rule 3 -A of the Code of Civil Procedure, provides that the party leading evidence must appear first of all as a witness. However, this provision further provides that if permission is granted by the Court, the party can appear as his own witness at a later stage. The Full Bench of this Court in the Amritsar Improvement Trust v. Smt. lshri Devi, 1979 PLR 354, considered the aforesaid provisions and held as under -

(3.) A perusal of Sub -rule (4) of Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as reproduced above, would show that for reasons to be recorded, the Court can permit any party to examine any witness at any stage. The rules of procedure are meant for administering substantial Justice and not to cause hindrance therein. Present is such a case where by mistake the Plaintiff closed his evidence without realising that his own statement had not so far been recorded, and immediately thereafter he moved the Court with an application. The Defendant has not led his evidence so far and thus no prejudice would be caused to him if the Plaintiff is allowed to appear as his own witness. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed. The order of the trial Court is set aside. The Petitioner is to be allowed one more opportunity to appear as his own witness which would be subject to payment of Rs. 300/ - as costs to be paid in the trial Court. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear in the trial Court on August 8, 1988. There will be no separate order regarding costs of this revision petition.