AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
20 paragraphs · 420 wordsGovinda Menon, J.—The learned Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam has construed the expression ""expenses of the commission"" in Order
XXVI, Rule 15, Civil P. C., as including the expenses to be defrayed by the opposite party to the one applying for the issue of a Commission for
proceeding from the locality where the Court is situate to the place where the commissioner is to function. There is no direct authority on the point
except the observations of my learned brother, Mack J. in Abdurahiman Settu Vs. Muhammad Kasam Settu, where the learned Judge observes
that:
The ''expenses of the commission'' can be made to include expenses of the other parties to the litigation and can in suitable cases be ordered to be
deposited by the party at whose instance the commission was taken out.
It seems to me that this proposition has been very widely stated. The phrase ""expenses of the commission"" in ordinary parlance would mean only
what the Commissioner has to spend for summoning witnesses and for other incidental expenses relating to the examination of the witnesses before
him. No authority has been placed before me where the words have been construed in such wide terms. Moreover, the Civil Rules of Practice
(Rule 82) does not contemplate any such thing and all that the rule says is :
Every application for the issue of a commission shall be supported by an affidavit setting forth the estimated expenses of the commission, and the
remuneration, if any, of the proposed Commissioner.
If one of the parties desires to travel luxuriously by air or in the first class on board a ship, it cannot be said that such a thing can be included as
expenses of the commission in the absence of any direct authority. I am not inclined to hold that the word ""expenses"" would moan that. The learned
Sub-Judge was of the opinion that the passage money and the railway fare would be Rs. 150/-; that cannot be allowed. The learned Subordinate
Judge directed the deposit of a sum of Rs. 250/- before the issue of a commission. That sum has to be reduced. The petitioner will deposit a sum
of RS. 125/- in the lower Court within one month from today. The learned Subordinate Judge will decide then as to the person to whom the
commission would issue and other necessary matters. If the amount is not deposited, the petition will stand dismissed with costs. Costs of the
revision petition will abide and follow the result of the suit.
