KHITIPATI ROY Vs. DHARANI MOHAN MOOKERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this matter, an order was made in Chambers on the 14th June 1920 on the application of the defendant for the issue of a commission to Mr. S.P. Sarbadhicary, Barrister at Law, authorising him to swear or affirm and examine viva voce Sm. Golap Sundari Debi, widow of Hari Mohan Boy, at Radhanagore in Khanakul in the District of Hooghly or at Calcutta, and Sm, Chamatkar Mohini Debi, wife of Surja Kanta Mukherjee, of No, 17, Ram Chandra Maitra s Lane, Shambazar in Calcutta, as witnesses on behalf of the defendant. This order was by consent of the parties represented by their respective solicitors.

(2.) On the 15th June Mr. M.N. Sen, attorney on behalf of Mr. P.N. Sen, the plaintiff s attorney, appeared in Chambers before me and asked for the revision of the order made on the previous day, on the ground that the plaintiff s attorney, when be consented to the order, had not had before him fall and sufficient facts bearing on the matter of the application for the issue of a commission. This application was rejected. On the 26th June the plaintiff s attorney gave notice of an application for the 2nd July for an order that the order of the 14th June for the issue of a commission to examine Sm. Golap Sundari Debi may be varied by striking out the words "at Badhanagore in the District of Hooghly."

(3.) Before this application could come on for hearing, it appears that the order of the 14th June was completed and filed on the 28th June and a copy thereof was served on the same day on the plaintiff s attorney.