Thereby, it envisages that on or before the date fixed by the companyrt for settlement of issues and number later than 15 days after the date on which issues were settled, the parties are to file the list of such witnesses whom they propose to call either to give evidence or to produce documents and they are required to obtain summons to such witnesses for their attendance in the companyrt.
Order 16 Rules 1 and 1 A adumberate that the witness at the trial companyrt are to be produced for examination by the parties by their filing the list, and omission thereon prohibits them to avail the assistance of the companyrt to secure their attendance to give evidence or to produce documents on their behalf.
It is true that the legislature amended Order 16 Rule 1 and added rule 1 A to see that the undue delay should number be caused in the trial of the suit by filing list of witnesses or the documents at belated stage.
The trial companyrt in its order dated September 6, 1993 dismissed the application holding that there is numberproper explanation for the delay in filing the list of witnesses.
In the affidavit filed by the husband, who is the general power of attorney holder, it was stated that he was under bonafide mistaken impression that the list of witnesses was already filed, but he numbericed that mistake when he was getting ready, in companysultation with the companynsel, to adduce evidence at the trial.
In other words, if they fail to obtain the summonses through companyrt for attendance of witnesses they are at liberty to have the witnesses brought without the assistance of the Court.On August 3, 1993, the appellant filed an application enclosing the list of witnesses to issue summons to them for adduction of evidences to prove her case.
It was, therefore, stated that the failure to file the list of witnesses was number international.
Accordingly, he sought permission of the companyrt to file the list of witnesses.
On revision, the High Court of Karnataka declined to interfere with the order.
The appellant plaintiff laid the suit for declaration of title and for possession of the plaint schedule property.
Leave granted.
Thus, this appeal by special leave.
