1. Through the medium of this revision petition an order passed by Munsiff, Jammu on 4.11.1993 has been called in question. The impugned order disposes of an application filed by the plaintiff-petitioner on 14.9.93. The application made a prayer for direction to the defendant-respondents to produce their witnesses at their own because while furnishing a list of witnesses on 18.12.1991 defendants had given a long list of 59 witnesses were required to be examined. The order under revision has dismissed that application and held that while furnishing the list due compliance of Order 16 Rule 1 C.P.C. has been made. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has come up in revision before this Court.

2. The suit is for eviction of a shop situate at Pacca Danga Jammu on the ground of personal necessity. I have gone through the long list of witnesses referred to above. By way of preamble defendant-respondent in para 2 of the application/ list submits that he wants to produce these witnesses for purposes of proving the fact that the plaintiff is not the owner/ landlord. On the other hand it is father of the plaintiff who is the owner/landlord of the shop in question. It is also asserted i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document