Sri Arvind L. Pitti v. Sri Mohd. Ibrahim Waziri

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CRP. Nos.1946 & 1947 OF 2009 COMMON ORDER:

These two Civil Revision Petitions arise between the same parties and out of the same Rent Appeal. Therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that pending these Revisions there was no stay of disposal of the said RA.No.200 of 2005 on the file of the Additional Chief Judge, City small Causes Court, Hyderabad and during the pendency of these Revisions, the said Rent Appeal itself was disposed of on 25.07.2015 and that challenging the said order, a Revision is sought to be filed by the petitioners. He therefore seeks to withdraw these two Revisions with liberty to raise the contentions raised in these Revisions in the CRP which the petitioners intend to file against the final order passed in RA.No.200 of 2005.

3. Counsel for the respondent is not present.

4. Since I find the request of the counsel for the petitioners is reasonable, these two Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioners to raise the contentions raised in these two Revisions, in the CRP which the petitioners intend to file against the final order in RA.No.200 of 2005. There shall be no order as to costs.

5. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions pending if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________________ M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J 29th September, 2015.

gra