THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

COMMON ORDER:

C.R.P.No.1009 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner - plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 04.07.2022 passed in I.A.No.106 of 2022 in O.S.No.8 of 2010 by the learned Principal District Judge, Bhongir.

2. C.R.P.No.1018 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner - plaintiff aggrieved by the order dated 04.07.2022 passed in I.A.No.105 of 2022 in O.S.No.8 of 2010 by the learned Principal District Judge, Bhongir.

3. A common order was passed in both the I.A.s.

4. I.A.No.105 of 2022 is filed under Section 151 of CPC to re-open the case of the petitioner - plaintiff and I.A.No.106 of 2022 is filed under Order XVI Rule 2 read with Section 151 of CPC to summon the defendant No.1 to subject himself for cross-examination by the petitioner - plaintiff.

5. The Assistant Manager of the petitioner - plaintiff filed an affidavit in support of both the petitions stating that he was working as Assistant Manager in Lands Department in plaintiff company, by name, Narne Estates. O.S.Nos.8 and

33 of 2010 were clubbed together and a joint trial was conducted in O.S.No.8 of 2010. The case was at the stage of arguments. The respondent No.1 - defendant No.1 had purchased the suit schedule property from the funds of the company, but was falsely claiming ownership and possession over the said property. Infact the respondent No.1 - defendant No.1 taking undue advantage of his post of paid director misappropriated the funds of the plaintiff company and misrepresented to the pattedar of lands and got executed various documents in his individual name, though the properties were purchased by the plaintiff company. The respondent No.1 - defendant No.1 deliberately did not choose to appear before the Court to adduce evidence and subject himself for cross-examination. He was hale and healthy, but wantonly not entered the witness box to avoid crucial aspects to be elicited from him in cross-examination. The respondent No.1 - defendant No.1 on 03.03.2022 made his appearance in a batch of criminal cases filed against him vide C.C.Nos.624 of 2006 to 632 of 2006 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Bhongir. Infact the petitioner - plaintiff intended to cross-examine the respondent - defendant No.1, as there were certain important aspects that would need to be brought to the notice of the Court through cross-examining him, but it could not be done, as he did not enter the witness box. When orally enquired, it was earlier informed that respondent - defendant No.1 was suffering with ill-health and was bed ridden and was not appearing before the Court. But the said aspect was found to be false, as he appeared before the Court on 03.03.2022 in the batch of criminal cases.

5.1. The petitioner contended that the cross-examination of respondent - defendant No.1 was essential to prove certain aspects pertaining to the case of the petitioner - plaintiff. No hardship would be caused to the respondents - defendants if the petition was allowed as prayed for, by summoning the respondent - defendant No.1 for cross-examination. On the other hand, if the said petition was not allowed, the petitioner - plaintiff would be put to grave injustice as real facts would remain in dark without the crucial witness i.e. defendant No.1 not being cross-examined. As such, prayed to summon the defendant No.1 - Mr. N.Gopal Naidu to subject himself to the Court for cross-examination by the petitioner -

plaintiff.

6. The respondent - defendant No.1 filed his counter denying that he deliberately did not choose to appear before the Court to adduce evidence. He contended that his health was badly broke down and he was not in a position to move from the bed even for nature calls, and he was on diapers. In the said circumstances, he was not able to give his evidence and did not appear himself before the Court. The same was due to his ill-health and bad condition of his body. He admitted that on 03.03.2022, he made his appearance in a batch of criminal cases filed a