The arguments advanced by Mr. C.R. Prasanan, learned counsel for the petitioner are heard. The petition, supporting affidavit and the documents produced in the form of typed-set of papers are also perused.

2. The plaintiff in the original suit is the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India invoking the power of superintendence of this Court over the subordinate Courts. The order sought to be challenged is one passed by the trial Judge on 07.10.2015 in I.A.No.495 of 2015 filed purportedly under Order VIII Rule 3 CPC. But, a consideration of the prayer made therein will make it clear that the petition was filed under a wrong provision of law instead of citing the correct provision Order XVIII Rule 3A CPC. The main provision of Rule 3A under Order XVIII CPC makes it a general rule that the party should appear as a witness on his/her side before ever examining any non-party witness on his/her side. The rule provides an exemption that the Court can grant permission for the party to appear as a witness at a later stage after examination of non-party witnesses on the side of the said party.

3. The supporting affidavit contain