HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH C.R.P. No. 3693 OF 2007 Thursday, the Eleventh day of November, Two Thousand and Ten Between Ganga Prasad Sharma Petitioner AND D.Markandeyulu Respondent ORAL ORDER: The petitioner is defendant in O.S. 261 of 2001. In the said suit, he filed I.A. No. 169 of 2007 under Order 16 Rules 5 and 7 of C.P.C. to summon second attestor of the suit pro-note, inasmuch as he is desirous to examine the second attestor in support of his defence taken in the suit. The said I.A. was dismissed holding that the plaintiff himself is examined as PW-1 and the scribe was examined in support of execution of the pro-note and, therefore, no attesting witness need be examined. It is stated that the execution of the suit pro-note was proved by the plaintiff. The defendant was also examined and the said petition filed by the defendant is not maintainable and it is an abuse of process of law to issue summon to such a witness. The petition filed under Order 16 Rule 5 and 7 CPC is not maintainable. Rule 5 relates to the particulars such as time, place and purpose of attendance, to be specified in the summons whereas; Rule 7 relates to the power of the court requiring a person present in the court to give evidence or produce documents. As the application is filed by the petitioner under irrelevant provision, I am not inclined to interfere with the order impugned in this Revision. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the court below. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah November 11, 2010 MAS