THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 5056 OF 2011 Dated: 07.12.2011 Between : P.Anji Reddy and another … Petitioners And Sri Balvinder Singh and another … Respondents The Court made the following:- THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI CIVIL REVESION PETITION No. 5056 OF 2011 O R D E R: The revision petitioners are the defendants in O.S.No.154 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the V Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District. The 1st respondent herein is the plaintiff, who filed the suit for specific performance of agreement of sale in respect of the suit schedule property against the defendants/revision petitioners and the 2nd respondent herein. During the trial, the plaintiff got himself examined as PW.1 and another witness was examined as PW.2. Thereafter, the 1st defendant filed his affidavit in lieu of chief examination as DW.1 and the suit was adjourned to 18.12.2008 for his cross examination. On 24.11.2008 the 3rd defendant filed an application for advancement of the proceedings to enable him to give evidence as DW.2 stating that he has to leave for United States of America by 29.11.2008. The said application was allowed on 28.11.2008 and the plaintiff was directed to cross examine DW.2 on 29.11.2008 before the Commissioner appointed to record the cross examination. On 29.11.2008 as the counsel for the plaintiff was unwell, a request was made on his behalf for adjournment, however the request was rejected and therefore the junior counsel commenced the cross- examination in the forenoon session and sought time for further cross- examination. His request was rejected and cross-examination was closed. On the same day in the afternoon session the senior counsel for the plaintiff appeared before the Commissioner and sought permission to continue the cross-examination. The said request was also rejected and the counsel for the plaintiff was not allowed to cross- examine P.W.2. In the above circumstances, I.A.No.329 of 2008 was filed by the plaintiff to recall D.W.2 for further cross-examination by the counsel for the plaintiff. The said application was allowed by the Court below by order dated 12.11.2010. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the defendants 1 & 2. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. Admittedly the matter was adjourned to 18.12.2008 for cross- examination of D.W.1. However, at the instance of the defendant No.3, the suit proceedings were advanced to 29.11.2008 by order dated 28.11.2008. As the counsel for the plaintiff was unwell, a request for adjournment was made on his behalf to adjourn the matter to some other date for cross-examination of D.W.2. The said request was rejected by the advocate-commissioner and the cross-examination of D.W.2 was closed abruptly. Admittedly the counsel for the plaintiff turned up on the same day in the afternoon session in spite of his ill- health. However he was not allowed to proceed with the cross- examination. Having taken note of the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view that important issues are involved in the suit, the Court below thought it fit to give an opportunity to the plaintiff to cross- examine D.W.2 and accordingly allowed I.A.No.329 of 2008 filed for recalling D.W.2 for further cross-examination. The said discretion exercised by the Court below on proper application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my considered opinion did not suffer from any illegality warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 07.12.2011 Ivd