THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4386 of 2010 Date of Order:02.02.2011 Between: Y.Lakshmi Durga and others ..Petitioners and M/s.Kamadhenu Financiers. ..Respondent The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4386 of 2010 ORDER :- Petitioner/defendant filed this revision under Article 227 of the constitution to revise the docket order passed by VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Vijayawada, in dismissing I.A.No.213 of 2010 in O.S.No.8 of 2000, dated 23.07.2010, whereby the petition filed to receive the document and to mark them to prove the case of the defendant, has been dismissed by a single line order. The manner in which the learned VII Additional District Judge dismissed the I.A. should be deprecated, as the same does not reflect applying the mind to the issue involved. Therefore, it is very difficult to know the reason why the said I.A. has been dismissed. Time and again it has been said that the order should indicate the reason and the trial court cannot expect that appellate court or revisional court will assign reasons in justification of their orders. Be that as it may, suffice it to say in the written statement filed by the petitioner, the petitioner/defendant has not referred to the evidence of the plaintiff/P.W.1 in O.S.No.4 of 2003 before the VII Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Vijayawada; or the plaintiff filing I.P.No.10 of 2000, dated 19.12.1999, before the II Additional District judge, Vijayawada against the defendant; and the stand taken by the plaintiff in her evidence in O.S.No.4 of 2003 and in I.P.; are inconsistent with the plea taken by the plaintiff in the present suit. In the absence of any such plea or any issue to the said effect, it is worth less to adduce evidence in that regard. Unless the written statement is amended suitably taking the plea with regard to the earlier stand taken by the plaintiff, the defendant cannot produce the said documents. In view of the same, though the learned Judge has not given any reasons, the dismissal of the I.A. is justified for the reasons aforementioned. The learned Judge is hereby called upon to show cause as to why the order passed in the C.R.P. should not be form part of his Confidential Record. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Registry is directed to communicate the copy of this order to the learned Judge for his explanation and on receipt of the said explanation, the impugned order as well as the order in the revision and the explanation may be placed before the Administrative committee. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J February 2, 2011 Lmv