PRAHLAD DAS Vs. KARUNARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision against the order of learned District Judge, Jodhpur dated 2-5-97 by which he dismissed the application of the petitioner under Order 18, Rule 17, C.P.C. and refused to recall the witnesses.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties at length.

(3.) An application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act was submitted by Karunaram to obtain succession certificate in relation to fixed deposit of Rs. 8,05,075.16 which was lying in a bank in the name of Kushaldas. The petitioner claimed himself to be the chela of Kushaldas who died on 24-10-88 at Barmer. Its general notice was published. Prahlad Das-petitioner came to know about these proceedings on 23-4-91 when the notice was published in Rajasthan Patrika and then he engaged Shri Gopal Raj Singhvi as his advocate. Then he was summoned as a witnesses in August, 1995. He went to Smt. Sushila and to his advocate then he came to know that his right to defend was closed on 31-7-93 as no reply was filed. He then moved an application under Section 151, C.P.C. and prayed to submit his written statement but the same was dismissed on 15-3-96. By that time Karunaram and his two witnesses had been examined before the learned District Judge. Then he moved an application under Order 18, Rules 17 and 17-A, CPC to the effect that since no ex parte proceedings were taken against him, Karunaram and his witness may be recalled and petitioner Prahlad Das may be given an opportunity to cross-examine these witnesses. The application has been dismissed by the learned District Judge. Hence this revision.