IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.825 of 2008 MEENA DEVI Versus PANMATI KUER ----------- 3 7/7/2008 No one appears for the petitioner. This application is directed against the order of the court below dated 27.2.2008, whereby and whereunder, prayer of the plaintiff to examine and record evidence has been allowed in purported exercise of power under order XVIII Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Court below while passing the impugned order has taken care not only of the compelling situation but has also recorded its reasons for exercise such power by holding that the plaintiff Panmati Kuer was extremely old and was also ailing and therefore it is essential to record her deposition. It has also taken into consideration that the plea of the petitioner opposing such prayer of the plaintiff was wholly unjustified, in as much as, merely because some tile suit no. 162 of 2003 was pending that could not have been taken away the substantive and valuable rights of the plaintiff to get an evidence recorded under order XVIII Rule 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure. There is no error in the impugned order, consequently, this application is dismissed. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar