at the interlocutory stage , no court should record choice witness statement without giving an opportunity to parties to lead evidence = the procedure adopted by the Court below is not warranted. According to him, even if the documents are to be summoned, recording of evidence on the side of the respondents, without there being any opportunity on the side of the petitioners/plaintiffs is not valid. - The grievance of the Revision Petitioners appears to be that they may not be given an opportunity to adduce evidence, and the evidence adduced on behalf of the respondents is likely to prejudice them.- the Court below is advised to take into consideration of the documents produced by the Revenue authorities and not their oral statements. In case, the Court is going to rely on such oral statements, the Revision Petitioners shall also be given an opportunity to adduce evidence on their side before disposal of the application. Further, the Court below is directed to proceed with as per the directions of this court.


THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L. NAGESWARA RAO

 

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.644 of 2013

ORDER:

The Revision Petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.346 of 2012 on the file of the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore
2.       The suit was one filed for injunction and I.A.No.754 of 2012 was filed for temporary injunction, which was granted and still subsisting. While matter stood thus, I.A.No.859 of 2012 was filed by the defendants to summon the Revenue Authorities for production of the documents.  At that stage, the Court has summoned the Revenue officials and also has recorded the evidence of Revenue Officials in part.
3.       The learned counsel for the Revision petitioners contends that the procedure adopted by the Court below is not warranted.  According to him, even if the documents are to be summoned, recording of evidence on the side of the respondents, without there being any opportunity on the side of the petitioners/plaintiffs is not valid.  Added to that, according to him, an elaborate inquiry by taking evidence need not be considered at this stage and the Court, if it is satisfied, can look into the documents and pass orders without the oral evidence being recorded.  The grievance of the Revision Petitioners appears to be that they may not be given an opportunity to adduce evidence, and the evidence adduced on behalf of the respondents is likely to prejudice them.
4.       Therefore, in view of the above circumstances, 
the Court below is advised to take into consideration of the documents produced by the Revenue authorities and not their oral statements. 
 In case, the Court is going to rely on such oral statements, the Revision Petitioners shall also be given an opportunity to adduce evidence on their side before disposal of the application. Further, the Court below is directed to proceed with as per the directions of this court.
5.       With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

____________________________
N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J
Dated: 15.02.2013
Note:
Issue wire at the
Cost of the parties.
(B/O)
VSV

Comments