The main legal point established is that the trial court should not extend the date for examination of witnesses beyond a reasonable period of time.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petitions filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to set aside the Fair and Final order dated 06.02.2023 in IA.No.9 of 2023 in O.S.No.193 of 2013, passed by the Learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem, and allow the Civil Revision Petition.)

1. This Civil Revision Petition had been filed by the Defendants 4 to 7 in O.S.No.193 of 2013 on the file of the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Subordinate court, Salem.

2. It is the contention of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners herein that the Defendants 4 to 7 as Petitioners in IA.No.9 of 2023 in O.S.No.193 of 2013 filed under Order XVI Rule 10(2) & Section 151 of CPC seeking proclamation directing G.Prabhakaran to appear as a witness before the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem in O.S.No.193 of 2013 on behalf of the Defendants. It is the further contention of the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioners that earlier IA.No.8 of 2022 filed by the Petitioners/Defendants 1 to 4 in O.S.No.193 of 2013 was allowed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem as per order dated 09.12.2022. When the case was posted for evidence, the said witness G.Prabhakaran did not appear. Therefore, he had filed this petition in IA.No.9 of 2022 which was dismissed after enquiry. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioners that after allowing IA.No.8 of 2022 to examine the witness G.Prabhakaran who was a witness to the Memorandum of Understanding which forms part of the dispute in the suit. The absence of the said witness prompted filing of this petition. The same learned Judge cannot dismiss the petition. Therefore, aggrieved by the order of dismissal of IA.No.9 of 2022 by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem, the Defendants 1 to 4 have filed this Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside the order passed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Salem, in IA.No.9 of 2022 in O.S.No.193 of 2013. The learned Counsel for the Revision Petitioners placed reliance on the reported ruling of the Hon''ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Suresh Nath Modi vs.L.Rs.Jorawarmal reported in 1999 SCC Online Raj 87 wherein it is held as under:

“C.P.C. Order 16, Rule 10 and Sec.32-closing the evidence of the plaintiff when some of the witnesses against whom summons and warrants had been issued- Once a party has moved an application for issue of process against a witness and the Court allows such appliction, the Court should not stay its hands at the choce of the witnessess o attend or not to attend the Court to give evidence.

3. Thiru. T.V. Ramanujam, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondents/Plaintiff by way of reply submitted that no proclamation is necessary and the Defendants 1 to 4, who are the Revision Petitioners could have taken out summons. The learned Senior Counsel Mr. T.V. Ramanujam relied on the reported ruling of this Court reported in 2009 (5) CTC 117 in case of T.P.Mani vs. Palanisamy and another wherein it is held as under:

“Civil Procedure- Application to issue proclamation u/s.16 r.10 calling upon District Registrar to produce document-Dismissal of -Legality.

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), Section 32 & Order 16, Rule 10

Process contemplated therein is coercive in nature and being extreme step of proclamation Court to be satisfied that evidence of witness was material and necessary- Court has to also see whether there was genuine or unforeseen circumstances prevented witness from appearing and if such situation exists fresh summons should be ordered giving sufficient time for appearance-If Court finds witness is deliberately avoiding and his absence was without lawful excuse, then Court is justified in issuing proclamation-Rule of law is supreme and be it ordinary witness or official witness, process of Court should be respected lest litigants will lose fait