L.Narasimha Reddy, J.—The petitioner filed O.S.No.1198 of 2006 in the Court of the IV Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa against respondent No.1 herein for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. Thereafter, respondent No.1 got herself impleaded and made claim vis-a-vis the suit schedule property. Issues were framed and the trial of the suit commenced.

2. During the course of her evidence, respondent No.2 stated that the suit schedule property has accrued to her husband by way of exchange with Kadapa Zilla Parishad. In a way, she has projected independent title in respect of the property.

3. The petitioner filed I.A.No.648 of 2010 under Rules 6, 7 and 14 of Order 16 CPC with a prayer to summon the Chief Executive Officer of Kadapa Zilla Parishad as a witness to produce the records and documents mentioned therein and to speak about them. The application was opposed by the respondents. Through order, dated 22.09.2010, the trial Court dismissed the I.A. It was observed that Rule 14 of Order 16 CPC does not confer right upon a party to require the Court to summon or examine a person as a Court witness. The same is chal