Short Note : 1. The defendant's application for examining two of their witnesses on commission, one at Wardha and another at Harda, was allowed by the trial Court by its order dated 30-9, 76 and the case was fixed for return of commission on 20-11-76. Thereafter the defendants submitted an application on 28-10-76. under section 151 C.P.C., before the trial Court that recording or the statements of witnesses of the defendants on commission at this stage would be premature and also prejudicial; that since the plaintiff bas not stepped into the witness-box and has not also examined any of the witnesses and as the defendants have to adduce evidence in rebuttal of the evidence that may be adduced by the plaintiff, who bas to prove its case, it would not be proper to direct the defendants to examine their witnesses first, though on commission. This prayer of the defendants to stay the examination of their witnesses on commission till the plaintiff's evidence is over, has been rejected by the trial Court. Hence this revision. 2. Held: It was submitted on behalf of the non-applicant-plaintiff that the applicants having not preferred any revision against the trial Court's order dated 30-9-76, by which it had ordered the return of commission by the next date, the applicants cannot be allowed to urge that the trial Court has committed illegality in passing the impugned order. But I am unable to agree with this submission. Order 18 rule 2, C.P.C., provides that that party should begin, on who me the burden of proof of all or most of the issues lies The burden of proof of issues of fact in this case is on the plaintiff. Therefore, it is for the plaintiff to prove the issues and it is only after the plaintiff closes his evidence that the defendants should be asked to begin. It is the right of the defendant to watch how far the plaintiff discharges the burden and also to see what evidence they should produce and, in these circumstances, in my opinion. the defendant applicants cannot be directed to produce their evidence on commission before the plaintiff has closed his case. Revision allowed.