THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.Nos.3178, 3179 and 3180 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: These civil revision petitions are disposed of by this common order. 2. The first respondent/plaintiff, who is the GPA holder of the second respondent herein, filed O.S.No.33 of 3005 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at Gajuwaka, for declaration of title over the suit schedule property. In the said suit, the petitioner/first defendant filed I.A.No.205 of 2009 under Order XVIII Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC seeking to recall D.W.1 for marking necessary documents on his behalf. He also filed I.A.Nos.206 and 366 of 2009 under Order VIII Rule 1-A(3) and Section 151 CPC seeking to condone the delay in filing the documents mentioned in the list. The trial Court, after consideration of the material on record, dismissed I.A.No.205 of 2009 on 28.04.2009 having observed that recall of DW1 does not arise unless and until the eschewed order against him is set aside, and in consequence thereof, I.A.Nos.206 and 366 of 2009 were dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed these revision petitions. 3. The first respondent filed counter in C.R.P.No.3180 of 2009 stating that the trial Court after conducting trial and hearing the both parties, reserved the suit for judgment, and at this stage, the petitioner filed the impugned petitions to protract the litigation and therefore, he prays to dismiss all these revision petitions. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that an opportunity may be given to the petitioner to recall DW1 and mark certain crucial documents, which are necessary for the purpose of this case. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the first respondent, while reiterating the counter averments, vehemently contended that though ample opportunity was given to the petitioner/defendant No.1, he did not turn up before the trial Court and that the suit is now reserved for judgment. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the first respondent. 7. The suit is of the year 2005 and it was adjourned from time to time for defendant’s evidence and finally, the trial Court eschewed the chief affidavit of DW1 and after hearing the parties, reserved the matter for judgment. At this stage, the petitioner came forward with the above petitions to recall DW1 and for marking certain documents. The trial Court has rejected his prayer as recall of DW1 does not arise since the eschewed order against him is set aside, and that ample opportunity was given to him by the trial Court by adjourning the matter from 08.02.2008 to 26.11.2008 and the suit is reserved for judgment. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order impugned warranting interference by this Court. 8. Accordingly, all these civil revision petitions are dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date:26.02.2010 Note: Issue CC within one week. (Bo) sj