Burra Laxmaiah v. Muthyala Srinivas Reddy And Another

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT C.R.P. No.1866 OF 2018 ORDER:

Heard Mr.Venkat Reddy for petitioner and Ms.Snehitha holding for Mr.Ram Mohan Reddy for respondents. The plaintiff in O.S. No.63 of 2010 is the revision petitioner. The revision petitioner aggrieved by the order of trial Court in refusing to reopen the suit for further evidence, filed this C.R.P. The learned trial Judge has taken note of the stage of the matter, when the evidence was closed and how the present application is filed at the stage of arguments to fill up the gaps. The refusal to reopen the suit in the considered view of this Court is by exercising the discretion judiciously and objectively. Though Mr.Venkat Reddy made a few submissions on the merits of the matter, this Court, for the present, is not examining the same and no exception can be taken to the order impugned in the C.R.P. In the case on hand, the affidavit is very casual and still the petitioner expects the Court to fill-up the gaps and grant the relief. No reason is made out and the C.R.P. fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________ S.V.BHATT, J Date:13.07.2018 Stp