BEER SINGH Vs. KARAMBIR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , herein, instituted Civil Suit No. RT -130 of 04.01.2007 against respondents. This suit was resisted by the respondents by filing written statement. Issues were framed and the case was fixed for evidence of the petitioner/plaintiff. The petitioner availed two opportunities and on the third opportunity, i.e. on 17.04.2012, his evidence was closed by order. Petitioner moved an application for his examination that was dismissed vide order dated 07.10.2013. Aggrieved against both the orders, the petitioner has come up with this civil revision with the prayer of acceptance thereof, and for setting aside both the orders and for according one opportunity to him to examine him as his own witness in the suit.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner very fairly conceded that he wrongly quoted order 18 Rule 17 in the application that was dismissed vide latter order of 07.10.2013.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is genuine. Only it was the third opportunity when his evidence was closed by order. Indeed, as per provision under Order 18 Rule 3A CPC, the petitioner as the plaintiff should have been examined first and if due to some reasons, he was not in a position to examine himself first, he should have sought permission from the trial Court for his examination after the examination of other witnesses.