CRP 8/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. HK Deka, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. By this application, the plaintiff has challenged the order dated 17.12. 2007 passed by the learned Munsiff in Title Suit No. 1025/2006 rejecting the pra yer of the petitioner for issuance of commission to examine two witnesses namely , Sri Ahad Ali and Sri Bhuban Ali on the ground that the plaintiff could not sub stantiate the claim that these two witnesses are either infirmed or suffering fr om sickness for which they are unable to attend the court. It has further been n oticed by the learned court that no medical certificates in support of their sic kness or infirmity so as to form an opinion relating to their inability to atten d the court for recording evidence has also been enclosed with the application. The application though was stated to have been filed under Section 75 an d Order 26 Rule 4(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 151 of the CPC, going through the contents of the said application, the same is found to b e an application under Order 26 Rule 2 of the CPC. Explanation to Order 26 Rule 1 of the CPC empowers the court to accept a certificate purporting to be signed by a registered medical practitioner as evidence of the sickness or infirmity of any person without calling the medical practitioner as a witness to form an opi nion relating to the inability of the witness to attend the court for examinatio n and for issuance of commission for his examination. Such medical certificates have not been enclosed with the application filed by the petitioner praying for an order for issuance of commission. The petitioner before this Court at this stage, has filed two medical ce rtificates purportedly issued by a registered medical practitioner. However, the se medical certificates cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of de ciding the legality or validity of the order dated 17.12.2007 passed by the lear ned Munsiff as these medical certificates were not before that court. In view of the aforesaid position, I do not find any merit in the presen t petition and in my opinion there is no ground to interfere with the said order . However, it will not preclude the petitioner from approaching the said c ourt again enclosing there with the medical certificates, if so advised. The revision petition stands dismissed.