Honble MADAN, J.–Shri Manoj Kumar Sharma petitioner who is a practising Advocate of this Court has preferred this revision petition against an order dated 10.1.2000 in Civil Suit No. 257/96 whereby the trial Court (ADJ No.8 Jaipur City) allowed defendant respondents application with costs of Rs. 1000/- under Order 16 Rule 1 CPC for allowing two additional witnesses for being examined in his support.

(2). A suit for eviction was instituted by the plaintiff (petitioner) against the defendant (respondent) on the grounds of : (1) default in payment of the rent, (2) sub-letting and (3) reasonable bonafide necessity. Written statement was filed by the respondent. The issues were framed. Additional Issues Nos. 9 & 10 were framed on 2.12.94 and 6.11.96 respectively. The plaintiff adduced his evidence and closed it on 11.2.99. The examination-in-chief of defendant who appeared as DW 1 was completed on 6.11.98 and thereafter since the plaintiff moved certain applications the trial Court first considered those applications. Ultimately, the plaintiff cross examined Jagdish defendant (DW1) on nine dates and closed his cross examination on 12.10.99. Since, it has been plaintiffs case that the def

Click Here to Read the rest of this document