THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4454 OF 2010 DATED: 22-10-2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 30-07-2010, in I.A.No.9 of 2010 in O.S.No.461 of 2005 on the file of the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner herein and the defendants 3 to 7 under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC to recall P.W.1 for further cross-examination, was dismissed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitiner-D1. None appeared for the respondents 1 and 2 herein-plaintiffs, though they were served with notices. Perused the record. 3. Respondents 1 & 2 herein filed the suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the plaint schedule land of Ac.0.54 cents. Petitioner herein and respondents 3 to 7 herein, who are the defendants, filed written statement contesting the suit. Necessary issues were settled by the trial Court. During the course of trial, P.W.1 was examined in chief and cross-examined. When the matter was coming up for further evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs, defendants filed I.A.No.9 of 2010 seeking to recall P.W.1 for further cross-examination. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court by the impugned order on the ground that the petitioner has not disclosed in the affidavit, the aspects on which they intend to further cross-examine P.W.1. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner-D1 would submit that the plaintiffs’ side evidence is still in progress and by inadvertence the aspects requiring further cross- examination could not be disclosed in the affidavit and the petitioner-D1 may be given an opportunity to further cross-examine P.W.1 so that the entire evidence is placed on record to enable just decision in the matter. 5. In view of the above submission, it is considered that an opportunity can be given to the defendants to further cross-examine P.W.1 so that the entire evidence is brought on record for an effective adjudication of the dispute. As the plaintiffs’ side evidence is still in progress, the request made by the petitioner-D1 and the respondents 3 to 7 herein-defendants to recall P.W.1 is not vitiated by any delay or laches. In the circumstances, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the same is accordingly set aside. Consequently, I.A.No.9 of 2010 stands allowed. Petitioner-D1 and the respondents 3 to 7 herein-defendants shall be given only one opportunity to further cross-examine P.W.1, however subject to the condition that they shall not protract the trial. 6. Accordingly, Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 22nd October, 2010. Note: Furnish C.C. of the order within two days. B/o Tsy