HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.853 of 2011 Date: March 11, 2011 Between: Ganepineni Kotaiah, S/o.Subbaiah, Hindu, aged 61 years, R/o.Iskapalem Village, Saipet Post, Kondapuram Mandal, Nellore District … Petitioner And Danam Venkateswarlu, S/o.Ankaiah, Hindu, aged 41 years, D.No.9-25-541, North Janathapet, Kavali Town, Nellore District and another Order: This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed aggrieved of the order dated 14- 12-2010 passed in I.A.No.556 of 2010 in O.S.No.51 of 2007 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kavali, Nellore District. Petitioner is the plaintiff in the aforesaid suit. He had filed the suit for specific performance and consequential injunction orders. Documentary evidence, i.e. Exs.A.1 to A.4 – Agreement of sale and Adangals were filed on his behalf. The evidence of the second defendant, who is contesting the matter, is completed and when the matter is posted for arguments, I.A.No.556 of 2010 is filed by the petitioner to reopen the matter to adduce further evidence of Tahsildar, Kondapuram Mandal. The court below, by the impugned order, rejected the application of the petitioner. In this case, it is to be noted that evidence is already adduced and documents are already filed. It is a matter to be considered by the Court below whether Exs.A.1 to A.4 will establish the possession of the petitioner in the light of the documentary evidence filed by the defendants. At this stage, petitioner cannot ask for reopening of the matter to examine Tahsildar. In view of the reasons assigned by the Court below, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order, which warrants interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Civil revision petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J March 11, 2011 MRR