Short Note : 1. During pendency of the trial on 21-9-1976, the witnesses of the defendant Rajendra Prasad and Jagdish Prasad were duly summoned and served, but the summons were not received back. Stating this the trial Court by the impugned order has terminated the right of the defendant to summon the witnesses in view of the fact that the case is old and pending since 18-9-1972. Held : After having heard the learned counsel for both the parties I am of the opinion that the impugned order is arbitrary and appears to have been passed in undue haste. The fact that the ejectment suit was instituted on 18-9-1972 and the same has become very old, cannot be a Judicial ground to terminate the right of the defendant to summon the witnesses, and as such the direction that the defendant should produce the witnesses himself is contrary to the provisions of Order 16, rule 1 read with rule 18 of order 16 C. P. C. The learned Civil Judge has acted in flagrant violation of the law. When the witnesses of defendant Rajendra Prasad and Jagdish Prasad were served and the summons were not received back, it was the duty of the trial Court to either wait for the summons or to have issued coercive processes to enforce the attendance of the witnesses if already served. Revision allowed