JUDGMENT : G.K. Misra, J. - On 7-1-1966 the Subordinate Judge passed an order to the effect: Plaintiff files another petition praying to direct the Defendant to begin as per the reasons stated therein. Heard Defendant to begin first. He will be given chance to rebut if necessary: Against this order the civil revision has been filed. 2. Plaintiff's suit was for recovery of an amount of Rs. 14,625/-. This amount consists of the principal amount of Rs. 7500/- advanced under the General Power of Attorney, interest at 9 percent per annum for 7 years and remuneration of Rs. 2400/- from 11-2-1958 to 11-2-1960. A number of objections were taken in the written statement. The following issues have been framed: 1. Has the Plaintiff cause of action to bring this suit? 2. Is this suit maintainable? 3. Is it barred by limitation? 4. Is the contract between the parties valid, binding upon the Defendant No. 2 and also enforceable against Defendant No. 2? 5. Whether there was advancement of Re. 7500/- on the basis of contract by Plaintiff to Defendant or not? 6. Is the claim for damages excessive and illegal? 7. What other relief, if any, the Plaintiff is entitled to? Mr. Mohanty fairly states that excepting for the advance of Rs 7500/- and payment of interest on the Power of Attorney the onus of proof for other Issues is on the Plaintiff. Even in respect of interest, the plea of limitation has been raised that it cannot be recovered for 7 years. 3. Under Order 18, Rule 3, Civil Procedure Code, there are several issues, the burden of proving some of which lies on the other party, the party beginning may, at his option, either produce his evidence on those issues or reserve it by way of answer to the evidence produced by the other party; and, in the latter case, the party beginning may produce evidence on those issues after the other party has produced all his evidence. The rest of the rule need not be referred to. Admittedly the onus of proving some of the issues is on the Plaintiff. He is to prove Issues 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6. The learned Subordinate Judge exercised his jurisdiction with material irregularity in passing a bald order that Defendants are to begin. Clearly the onus of proof of some issues is on the Plaintiff. Admittedly the onus of proving some of the issues is on the Plaintiff. He is to prove Issues 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6. The learned Subordinate Judge exercised his jurisdiction with material irregularity in passing a bald order that Defendants are to begin. Clearly the onus of proof of some issues is on the Plaintiff. Plaintiff must therefore begin. It is open to him to exercise his right of reservation as prescribed in Order 18, Rule 3. 4. The order of the learned Sub-Judge is set aside and the civil revision is allowed with costs. Hearing fee of Re. 50/-. The records of the case be sent back at once. The learned Sub Judge is directed to dispose of the case expeditiously. Final Result : Allowed