- (1.)ADMIT. Heard finally by consent of parties.
(2.)THIS revision by the original defendants is directed against the order passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandrapur on 29-10-1999 on Exhibit 82 allowing the respondents/plaintiffs to lead evidence of one of the plaintiffs No. 3 even after they had examined the other witnesses.
(3.)BRIEF facts are that the respondents/plaintiffs had filed suit for specific performance of contract against the appellants/defendants. At the trial, plaintiff had examined witness Keshav who was the holder of Power of Attorney for the respondents. Thereafter the respondents wanted to examine one surveyor as their witness. Before the witness surveyor could be examined, the applicants had filed pursis (Exhibit 64) stating therein that the plaintiffs had given list of witnesses and shown the plaintiffs as their witnesses and thus, mentioned that no other witness could be examined prior to the examination to plaintiff without leave of the Court. On that pursis, the learned trial Judge passed order, "permission granted to examine plaintiffs witnesses as the power of attorney for plaintiffs is already examined. The question of examination of plaintiff evidence shall be decided at proper stage". Thereafter the evidence of surveyor came to be recorded. It is thereafter that the respondents filed application (Exhibit 82) seeking permission of the Court to allow the plaintiffs to examine plaintiff No. 3. It is this application which came to be allowed by the learned trial Court under Order 18, Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is against this order that this revision is filed under section 115 of the Code.