( 1 ) THIS Civil Revision Petition is filed as against the order of the District Judge of West Godavari, Eluru in I. A. No. 1222 of 1953 in O. S. No. 45 of 1950, refusing to admit in evidence the depositions of certain witnesses, in O. S. No. 26 of 1930, on the file of the Agency Munsif s Court, Polavaram, under section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act. One of the questions to be decided in the present suit is, whether Veeranna, the husband of the 2nd defendant and father of the 3rd defendant, was the adopted son of Tirupati Rayudu. The plaintiff is the daughter and the 1st defendant is the widow of Tirupati rayudu. The depositions, sought to be marked in evidence under section 33 of the Evidence Act, were those recorded in O. S. No. 26 of 1930 on the file of the Agency Munsif s Court, Polavaram. That was a suit filed by Veeranna against Khandavilli Pullayya, a debtor of Tirupati Rayudu s estate. The defence put forward by Pullayya was that Veeranna was not the adopted son of Tirupati ravudu and had consequently no locus standi to sue for recovery of the money due to Tirupati Rayudu s estate. Six witnesses were examined on behalf of veeranna to prove that he was the adopted son. Excep

Click Here to Read the rest of this document