- (1.) This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 12.5.2009 passed by Sub Judge, Ranchi in Title Suit No. 164 of 2004 rejecting the petition filed on behalf of the plaintiffspetitioners under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recalling D.W. Nos. 1 and 2 for their cross-examination.
(2.) It is submitted by Mr. B.V. Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that after framing of additional issues on 16.3.2009, the said petition was filed as it was necessary to examine the said witnesses. The learned court below has recorded the following findings:- " Heard and perused the record. On perusal of order dated 16.3.2009 it appears that the Court find and hold that "since the matter of proposed issues are already mentioned in the plaint and W.S. of the parties but due to oversight the said issues were not framed earlier though they were thoroughly cross-examined by the learned counsel of plaintiffs in detail on 15.2.2008 on the point of whether Shivram Bhagat is 'kathbeta' of Bodhe Bhagat or not and regarding execution of will and she replied in detail about this matter in para 25, 27, 28, 29, 35, 36, 39, 40,41, 43 of her crossexamination. Likewise D.W. 2 Ashok Bhagat has also been cross examined in detail by the plaintiffs on the above referred points. It is important to mention herewith all the above matters were already looked by this Court and thereafter on 16.3.09 issues were recast. Further earlier on behalf of plaintiffs a petition Under/Order XVIII Rule 17 C.P.C. for recall of evidence has been filed which was after hearing both parties disposed of by this Court vide order dated 4.2.09. Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case I find and hold that since the matter raised by plaintiffs in their petition dated 27.3.09 U/O XVIII Rule r/w 151 C.P.C. has no force as because the D.W. 1 and DW 2 were already cross examined by the plaintiffs in detail on referred matters and earlier petition of plaintiffs U/O XVIII Rule 17 C.P.C. was already rejected on 4.209 in such circumstances in the interest of justice the instant petition of plaintiffs U/O XVIII Rule 17 r/w Section 151 C.P.C. is found not maintainable hence the same is hereby rejected. Put up on 16.5.09 for argument."
(3.) I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of my supervisory power under article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, no costs.;