Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.-This is a Civil Revision Petition against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirapalli imposing certain terms to be fulfilled by an applicant who prayed for the issue of a commission to examine certain witnesses in Calcutta. The case has been directed to be posted before a Bench by reason of certain conflicting decisions of this Court on the powers of the Court under Order 26, rule 15, Civil Procedure Code.

The first defendant is the petitioner in this Court. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for the recovery of about Rs.300 alleged to be due for shortage of goods, supplied by the 1st defendant-company. The defence was that there was no default on the part of the 1st defendant and that all the goods for which the plaintiff had. paid were loaded in the wagons of the Railway Company. To prove that they had fulfilled their obligations under the contract, the 1st defendant-company filed an application for the examination of four persons on commission at Calcutta, through the Court of Small Causes, Calcutta. As the witnesses were residents of Calcutta and as Calcutta was admittedly more than 200 miles from Tiruchirapalli, the 1st defendant had a prima

Click Here to Read the rest of this document