(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order made in I.A.No.20 of 2025 in O.S.No.2 of 2017 dated 12.08.2025 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani and allow this revision petition with cost.)

1. Aggrieved by the order passed by the IV Additional District Judge, Erode District at Bhavani in I.A.No.20 of 2025 in O.S.No.2 of 2017, dated 12.08.2025 dismissing the application filed by the petitioner/1st defendant seeking to eschew the evidence of PW.2, he has come before this Court.

2. The respondent herein filed a suit for recovery of money based on promissory note. The respondent examined one Ramakrishnan, who attested the Promissory Note as first attesting witness as PW.2. Though he was examined in chief, he has not appeared for cross examination and hence, the instant application has been filed by the petitioner seeking to eschew his evidence. The said application was opposed by the respondent on the ground that PW.2 was examined in chief on 14.12.2020 and on that day, the petitioner could not cross examine the witness and thereafter, witness summons were taken to the said witness twice and witness summons were returned with an endorsement 'No Such Address'. Since the petitioner side failed to cross examine the witness on the date he appeared for chief examination, according to the respondent, the present application filed to eschew the evidence could not be accepted.

3. The Trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that evidentiary value of chief examination of PW.2 could be considered at the time of pronouncing judgment. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come before this Court.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contended that evidence recorded during chief examination of the witness, who failed to appear for cross examination cannot be relied by the respondent.

5. It is settled law that when a witness is examined by a party, the opposite party shall be given an opportunity to cross examine the witness. It is the duty of the party calling a witness to procure his presence and make him available for cross examination by the opposite party.

6. In the case on hand, it is stated that in spite of witness summons to PW.2, his presence could not be procured as the summons were returned with an endorsement 'No Such Address'. PW.2 was called as a witness of the respondent and it is his duty to find out his correct address and procure his presence for cross examination. If the respondent is not able to produce his witness for cross examination, his evidence in chief examination cannot be taken into consideration. The deposition of witness in chief examination will not have any evidentiary value unless it is subjected to cross examination. In such circumstances, the impugned order passed by the Trial Court requires interference and the same is set aside.

7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.