CRP 24/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. K.K. Mahanta, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner as well a s Mr. Medhi, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party. The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in Title Suit No.437/2007, by the p resent petition is challenging the order dated 06.08.2010 passed in the said sui t allowing the opposite party/defendant to adduce evidence in the counter claim. The learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that since the opposi te party/defendant’s application under Order 9 Rule 7 of the CPC for refusing to vacate the order to proceed ex-parte against him was rejected on 20.05.2010, th e learned Court below ought not to have given a further opportunity to the oppos ite party/defendant to adduce evidence in the counter claim. The learned counsel appearing for the opposite party, however, submits t hat even if the opposite party/ defendant is not permitted to participate in the suit because of the order dated 25.08.2009 by which order the suit was directed to be proceeded ex-parte, the counter claim filed by the opposite party/defenda nt being the nature of an independent suit, he cannot be debarred from adducing evidence and accordingly the learned Court below has rightly passed the order. It appears from the impugned order dated 06.08.2010 that the learned Cou rt below has allowed the opposite party/defendant to adduce evidence on the coun ter claim filed by him. The grounds taken by the petitioner in challenging the o rder dated 06.08.2010, as noticed above, does not exist, as by separate order pa ssed today in CRP No.241/2010, the order dated 20.05.2010 passed by the learned Court below in the said suit has been set aside, thereby the order dated 25.08.2 009 passed by the learned Court below to proceed ex-parte against the opposite p arty/defendant has been set aside. The opposite party/defendant, therefore, will now participate in the said suit. By the said order the defendant has also been given one further opportunity to cross-examine the plaintiff’s witnesses. That being the position, the suit will proceed from that stage afresh an d after closer of plaintiff’s witnesses, the defendant would naturally be allowe d to adduce his evidence in the suit as well as in the counter claim. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.