ASHOK K.GOEL Vs. VENU BAKSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is meant to dispose of the aforesaid applications i.e. OMP No. 202 of 2003 under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) for framing additional issues moved by the plaintiff and OMP No. 233 of 2003 under Section 151 of the Code of bringing on record, certain document, namely, the ticket for outdoor patient issued from the IGMC Shimla and Associated Hospitals Shimla in the name of the plaintiff and the question whether the plaintiff having already availed of more than three opportunities to appear -as his own witness and having failed to so appear on 10.6.2003 can he be given, further adjournment for appearing as his own witness in view of the provisions of Proviso to Rule 1 of Order 17 of the Code.

(2.) The material facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of the aforesaid applications and the question are that the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance and for permanent perpetual prohibitory injunction is pending in this Court. The plaintiff was to appear as his own witness on 10.6.2003. However, the plaintiff failed to appear on 10.6.2003. The learned Counsel foe - the plaintiff prayed for an adjournment on the ground that the plaintiff was ill and produced an OPD slip issued from IGMC Shimla. The question, however, arose as to whether having availed more than three opportunities to lead his evidence can further adjournment be granted for recording the statement of the plaintiff in view of the provisions of Order 17 Rule 1 of the Code. After this question had arisen and the parties were to be heard on this question, application (OMP No. 202 of 2003) was moved on behalf of t he plaintiff for framing additional issues and another application (OMP No. 233 of 2003) was moved for bringing on record the document i.e. the OPD Slip dated 10.6.2003 issued by the IGMC Shimla regarding illness of the plaintiff.

(3.) The defendant contested OMP No. 202 of 2003 and filed reply thereto. However, no reply was filed to OMP No. 233 of 2003.