DURGA DASS Vs. SURINDER NATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two submissions have been made before me by Shri B.B. Vaid in support of this second appeal which has been filed by one of the Defendants The first is that the trial court was bound to have afforded an opportunity to the Defendants to examine themselves as witnesses even though the two Defendants, who were, admittedly, present before the Court, had not asked for it.

(2.) A perusal of the judgment of the courts below shows that repeated opportunities were afforded to the Defendants to produce evidence. They did not avail of that opportunity. The trial court closed their evidence on March 16, 1967. The Defendants were present before the court. They did not make any prayer that they be examined as their own witnesses. The trial court was, in the circumstances, justified in proceeding on the basis that there was no evidence in support of the plea put forward on behalf of the Defendants in the written statement.

(3.) It was urged by Shri Vaid that inasmuch as the defenders were illiterate people the court was bound, if not in law -then, in equity, to have itself asked them to appear as witnesses in. the case. Suffice it to say that no material has been pointed out to me from which it can be inferred that they were illiterate. No legal provision or precedent has been shown which casts such a burden on the court in a situation of the nature present in this case.