1. Heard Mr.S. Parthasarathy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Thought the respondent has been served even on 29.8.1997, there is no appearance on his behalf. He was called absent. Arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner were heard.

2. The above revision has been filed against the order in I.A.No.61 of 1997 in O.S.No.346 of 1991 on the file of the District Munsif, Kulithalia and dated 9.6.1997. The petitioner herein has filed the suit claiming partition and separate possession of his 1/15 share in the suit properties which was comprised in several survey numbers and also for accounting. The respondent herein who is the father of the petitioner was impleaded as the 2nd defendant, the petitioners grand father was impleaded as the 1st defendant and he died pending suit. The other legal heirs were impleaded as defendants in the suit. In the said suit the respondent herein/father of the petitioner disputed the fact that he is the father of the petitioner herein.

3. The suit was taken up for trial and after examination of the witnesses, the respondent herein filed n application under Section 151, CPC read with Section 45 of the Evidence Act seeking directions fr