ORDER 1. Heard the Petitioner in person & the Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.1. 2. The Writ Petitioner has challenged the Order Dated 15.5.2009 passed in C.S. No. 391 of 2005 by the Learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Cuttack. The Petitioner is the Defendant No.1 in the suit. 3. During the course of hearing of the suit, a Petitioner was filed by the Defendant No.2 with a prayer to allow him to lead evidence in the suit. The Learned Civil Judge considering the said application which was objected to by the present Petitioner, who is Defendant No.1 in the suit & on pursuing the case record found that the Defendant No.2 has filed a memo admitting the case of the Plaintiff. However, the Learned Civil Judge holding that it is a settled principle of law that even if a Defendant failed to file written statement. He can participate in the proceeding & can lead evidence & cross examine the witness examined by the Plaintiff, allowed the prayer made by the Defendant No.2 to lead evidence. 4. It appears from the impugned order that the Learned Trial Court has placed reliance on the decision in the case of Modula Indian v. Kamakshya Singh Deo, AIR 1989 SC 162 . In the case of Modula India (supra), the Supreme Court was examining the right of a Defendant to participate in the hearing of the proceeding when his defence has been struck off. In the facts of the said case, the Supreme Court held that even in a case where the defence against delivery of possession of a tenant is struck off under Section 17 (3), the Defendant tenant, subject to the exercise of an appropriate discretion by the Court on the facts of a particular case, would generally be entitled (a) to cross-examine the Plaintiff's witnesses & (b) to address argument on the basis of the Plaintiffs case. However, When the Defendant is afforded the aforesaid right the would not be entitled to lead any evidence of his own nor can his cross-examination be permitted to travel beyond the very limited object of pointing out the falsity or weaknesses of the Plaintiffs case. However, When the Defendant is afforded the aforesaid right the would not be entitled to lead any evidence of his own nor can his cross-examination be permitted to travel beyond the very limited object of pointing out the falsity or weaknesses of the Plaintiffs case. In no circumstances, should the cross-examination be permitted to travel beyond this legitimate scope & to convert itself virtually into a presentation of the Defendant's case either directly or in the from of suggestions put to the Plaintiff's witnesses. 5. This Court relying upon the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court, in the case of Krushna Chandra Sahoo v. Shyam Sundar Sahoo & other, 2005 (I) CLR 131 : 2005 (I) OLR 104 , reiterate the said position of law. 6. It, therefore, clearly transpires that the Learned Trial Court under misconception & misreading the ratio of the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court has wrongly passed the impugned order by holding that the Defendant can lead evidence. 7. It is law that evidence in a civil proceeding can only be led to prove the facts pleaded or to rebut the evidence led by the adversary in support of his pleadings. When such pleadings have been denied by him in his pleadings, question of leading evidence in absence of pleadings is, therefore, not permissible. 8. Hence, the impugned order being contrary to law, stands quashed with a direction that the Defendant No.2 can only be permitted to cross-examine the witness (s) examined on behalf of the Plaintiff as we as the Defendant No.1. But such cross-examination shall be restricted only to find out the falsity in it or weakness of the case of the Plaintiff or Defendant No.1. Under no circumstances, such cross-examination shall be permitted to travel beyond the above situation so as to convert itself virtually into a presentation of the Defendant case which has not been pleaded by the Defendant No.2 as he has not filed any pleadings (written statement) 9. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. The interim order passed earlier stands vacated. All pending Misc. Cases also stand disposed of. Since the suit is of the year 2005, the Learned Trial Court shall expedite hearing of the suit & make an attempt to finally dispose of the same by the end of this year. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules Appeal disposed of