Koduru Praveen Kumar, v. Moolapalli Sireesha Rani,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO C.R.P.No.4501 OF 2017

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is directed against docket order dated 25.07.2017 in I.A.No.286 of 2017 in O.S.No.27 of 2016 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore. The petitioner is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff.

The plaintiff filed the said suit for permanent injunction against the defendant. Evidence of both sides was completed and at the stage of arguments, the defendant, who is the petitioner herein, filed I.A.No.286 of 2017 seeking to re-open the suit for marking certain documents.

In the affidavit filed in support of the application, the defendant stated that his father, who was a witness in the said suit, deposed that the agreement, now, sought to be filed, was already filed in the Court and when the defendant noticed that the said agreement was not filed, he filed the present application. In the affidavit, he did not state the date on which the evidence of his father was completed.

A counter-affidavit was filed by the respondent-plaintiff stating that the petitioner has not sought for any specific reason to re-open the matter except to prove his contention that the property is covered under Exs.B1 and B2. It was also

stated that the Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to localize and measure the schedule mentioned land with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor.

Based on the material placed before it, the trial Court dismissed the application by order dated 25.07.2017. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that after posting the matter for arguments, the matter was adjourned twice for adducing further evidence and this application was filed at that stage. The suit was re-opened on 20.2.2012, 6.1.2017, 27.1.2017 and 12.6.2017 for cross-examining the petitioner herein and marking certain documents. In spite of giving such opportunity, the petitioner did not file the documents. In those circumstances, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the application was filed only to protract the suit proceedings.

As stated above, the affidavit is bereft of any reasons for re-opening the evidence at the fag end of the case and the purpose for which the document is sought to be marked. It is also stated that the proposed document is only a link document and the main documents are already filed. In view of the same, I do not see any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the trial Court.

Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

___________________________________ JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO 17th November, 2017 rkk