THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.3882 of 2011 ORDER: The respondent filed O.S.No.56 of 2008 in the Court of I Additional District Judge, Ongole against the petitioner for refund of sale consideration. The trial of the suit commenced. The respondent filed affidavit in lieu of chief-examination. He did not appear before the trial Court for cross-examination. I.A.No.667 of 2001 was filed on his behalf with a prayer to appoint an Advocate-commissioner to record his cross- examination. The petitioner filed a counter affidavit, opposing the I.A. He stated that the respondent figured as party in several matters and the application was filed with an oblique motive only to avoid appearance in the Court. It was also mentioned that the affidavit filed in support of the I.A. was not the one, of the party, and that his Advocate filed the same. The trial Court allowed the I.A through order, dated 29.06.2011. Hence, this revision. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Though notice is served upon the respondent, he did not enter appearance. The amendment made to C.P.C. in the recent past has done away with the recording of chief- examination in the Court. The tenor and demoneur of a witness can be noticed by the Court at least when the witness appears before it for cross-examination. It is only in rare cases, where the witness is not physically able to attend the Court, that the facility of appointing a Commissioner to record cross-examination can be extended. In the instant case, the respondent is young person of 40 years old. It is curious to note that the affidavit seeking appointment of commissioner was filed by his counsel. Time and again, the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court deprecated the practice of Advocates filing affidavits on behalf of their parties. Further, what all the Advocate said in his affidavit is that “plaintiff has been suffering from fever along with back pain for 15 days”. In his counter, the petitioner stated that the respondent has acquired notoriety, so much so N.B.Ws. are pending and he is avoiding his appearance in Courts. Unfortunately, the learned Judge did not take note of any of these aspects and has simply allowed the application. It is on account of the steps of this nature that the very seriousness of trial is watered down and the parties take advantage of the situations. Therefore, the civil revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. The trial Court is directed that it shall not exempt the respondent from appearing for cross-examination and eschew the affidavit filed in lieu of chief- examination, if he does not turn out for cross-examination. There shall be on order as to costs. __________ 01.12.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.3882 of 2011 Date: 01.12.2011 JSU