JUDGMENT :—Leave granted.

The appellant plaintiff laid the suit for declaration of title and for possession of the plaint schedule property. On August 3, 1993, the appellant filed an application enclosing the list of witnesses to issue summons to them for adducting of evidence to prove her case. In the affidavit filed by the husband, who is the general power of attorney holder, it was stated that he was under bona fide mistaken impression that the list of witnesses was already filed, but he noticed that mistake when he was getting ready, in consultation with the counsel, to adduce evidence at the trial. It was, therefore, stated that the failure to file the list of witnesses was not intentional. Accordingly, he sought permission of the Court to file the list of witnesses. The trial Court in its order dated September 6, 1993 dismissed the application holding that there is no proper explanation for the delay in filing the list of witnesses. On revision, the High Court of Karnataka declined to interfere with the order. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

2. Order 16 Rules 1 and 1(A) adumberate that the witnesses at the trial Court are to be produced for examination by the parties by the