The petitioner is a lady doctor who after retirement started a Hospital and Nursing Home at Kollam. It is the petitioner's case that the 1st respondent was appointed as a watchman at their residence. On the other hand, the case of the 1st respondent is that he was appointed as a watchman of the Hospital and Nursing Home. The Is respondent filed an application before the 2nd respondent under S.7(4) of the Payment of Gratuity Act claiming that he was in service from 1975 to 1989. The petitioner filed a written statement denying the allegation and contending that the 1st respondent being a domestic servant would not come within the provisions of Payment of Gratuity Act. The case was posted for evidence and the 1st respondent was examined. He also filed a witness schedule Ext. P1. While application was pending, the 1st respondent filed an application seeking to summon the petitioner who is the opposite party as a witness for and on behalf of the Ist respondent. The petitioner raised objection. Overruling the objection, the 2nd respondent ordered to summon the petitioner as a witness. Ext. P2 is the said order. In this Original Petition, Ext. P2 is challenged.

2. Learned coun