IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1285 OF 2010 Between : Naseema Begum and others. .... PETITIONERS A N D Jeelani Begum …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 1285 OF 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 10.03.2010, in I.A.No.77 of 2010 in O.S.No.711 of 2007, on the file of X Additional Senior Civil Judge, (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder and whereby, the application filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 C.P.C. to recall P.W.1 for further cross-examination, was dismissed on the ground of deletion of Order XVIII Rule 17 (A) C.P.C. under Act 46 of 1999 of C.P.C. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that P.W.1 was cross-examined by the learned counsel for the respondent at length and after cross-examination ordinarily the witness cannot be recalled unless some more new facts come to light after cross-examination was over and those new facts were not within the knowledge of the parties. To recall a witness, there must be a justifiable ground. It is not a matter of course. When a witness is cross-examined at length in all respects, he cannot be recalled for the purpose of filling the gaps and lacunas in the case of the parties. After cross-examination of the party, there must be sufficient reason or cause for recalling the witness 4. Though under Order XVIII Rule 17 C.P.C. the Court has got power to recall the witness, but that can be exercised by showing sufficient reason by the party. In the affidavit filed by the petitioners in support of the petition, no cause or reason is mentioned to recall P.W.1 except stating that “if proper opportunity to cross-examine P.W.1 to elicit all the relevant facts the petitioners / defendants will suffer sufficient irreparable loss”. Some of the aspects stated in the chief- examination of P.W.1 were not cross-examined. What are the aspects, which were not cross-examined, have not been stated in the affidavit filed by the petitioners. Hence, the trial Court exercised its discretion in dismissing the petition and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU. J OCTOBER 19, 2010. YVL