MALKIAT SINGH Vs. HARDIP KAUR ALIAS MALKIAT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been directed against the order dated 17. 10. 1997 passed by the learned Civil Judge (S. D.) Dabwali. By this order, the learned Civil Judge has allowed an application filed by the defendants for summoning one Chanan Ram Petition Writer for further cross-examination.

(2.) MR . Goyal, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the application was filed under Order 18 Rule 17 C. P. C. for summoning of this witness and under the provisions of Order 18 Rule 17 C. P. C. , even if an application is allowed, the witness can be examined only by the Court and can not be cross-examined by the other side. In support of his submission the learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Smt. Sudha Rani v. Life Insurance Corporation of India, 1980 R. L. R. 663.

(3.) THE decision in the case of Sudha Rani (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel of the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the present case as in that ! case the application was made under Order 18 Rule 17 read with Section 151 but in the present case, as stated herein above, though the provisions have not been correctly stated in the application but the contents of the application clearly shows that this application in fact was under Order 18 Rule 17-A C. P. C.