PARAMANANDA FATESHINGH Vs. LABANYA BEWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 1 and 2 to O.S. No. 159/72 in the court of the Munsif, Khurda, have preferred this revision against the order of the trial court rejecting their prayer to examine defendant No. 2 on 27-2-1978 as a witness in the suit.

(2.) The hearing of the suit started on 20-2-1978. For the first time the witness for the defendants were examined on 23-2-1978. On that date defendant No. 2 was not present and so he could not be examined as a witness. Of course no petition to enable this defendant to be examined on a subsequent date was filed. On the next day i.e. on 24-2-78, when 3 other witnesses on behalf of the defendants were to be examined and were actually examined, a petition on behalf of the defendants was filed to enable defendant No. 2 to be examined as a witness in this case on a later date, as he, due to unavoidable reasons could not come to the court on that date. The court below dismissed the said petition on taking a very strict and conservative view of Rule 3-A of Order 18, C.P.C. Hence this revision.

(3.) In Maguni Dei's case (1978-45 Cut LT 356) : (AIR 1978 Orissa 228 April part) a Division Bench of this Court has held that the court can examine a party at a later stage if it considers the evidence essential despite some negligence on the part of a party. The observations made in that decision and the law laid down therein with regard to this rule should be perused by the courts in disposing of matters of this nature.