1. The present civil revision petition has been filed challenging the order of the learned District Munsif, Kangayam dated 24.6.2011 made in I.A.No.336 of 2011 in O.S.No.331 of 2005.

2. The 10th defendant in the above referred suit is the petitioner, the plaintiff thereon is the first respondent and the other defendants are the other respondents.

3. In a suit filed by the first respondent herein against the petitioner and other respondents for partition and separate possession, the petitioner herein has filed an application to strike out the evidence of D.W.4 viz, the proof affidavit filed by him. The reason being that he has been arrayed as second defendant in the said suit and since he has remained exparte, he cannot be treated as a witness and examined as D.W.4.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contended that Order 17 Rule 1 C.P.C. prohibits the same. In order to appreciate the contention raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it would be more appropriate to extract Order 16 Rule 1 C.P.C. which is extracted here under:-

"1. List of witnesses and summons to witnesses:- (1) On or before such date as the Court may appoint,