Burden of proof and witness summoning upheld where GST records were outside possession and relevance could be tested later.

A trial court order permitting the respondent to summon a GST Department witness for production of GST records was upheld. The records were stated to be outside the respondent's power, possession and control, and the witness was allowed to be summoned on costs. The objection that no list of witnesses was on record was not treated as sufficient to bar the respondent from adducing evidence. The court emphasised that a plaintiff bears the burden of proving its case and may choose the witness needed for that purpose, while objections on relevance can be examined when the evidence is actually led.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Trial Court erred in permitting the respondent to summon a witness from the GST Department for production of GST records relating to the petitioner.

Analysis: The petition arose from an interlocutory order passed at the stage of the respondent's evidence. The record showed that the GST documents were stated to be outside the respondent's power, possession and control, and the Trial Court allowed the witness to be summoned on costs. The petitioner's objection that no list of witnesses was on record was not found sufficient to prevent the respondent from leading evidence in support of its case. The Court held that the plaintiff has the burden to prove its case and is entitled to decide which witness is required for that purpose, while questions of relevance can be examined when the evidence is actually led.

Conclusion: No infirmity was found in the Trial Court's order permitting summoning of the GST Department witness, and the petition was dismissed.

---