GHANSHYAM Vs. CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed by the petitioner -applicant under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dt. 27.11.2013 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh, Alwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial Court') in case No. 34/130/98 (New No. 34/79/02), whereby the trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 151 of CPC seeking permission to give evidence on behalf of his father, who is the defendant (respondent No. 3) in the suit. It is submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Mohar Pal Meena for the petitioner that the father of the petitioner is suffering from senile dementia and he is not able to give any evidence, and therefore, the petitioner be permitted to give evidence on behalf of his father.

(2.) THE said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted for the simple reason that nobody can give evidence on behalf of the other person. As rightly observed by the trial Court, if the petitioner is desirous of giving evidence as a witness he can do so but he cannot give evidence on behalf of his father, more particularly when the legal insanity of his father has not proved so far. There being no illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial Court, the present petition deserves to be dismissed, and is accordingly dismissed.