THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO C.R.P.No.88 OF 2011 ORDER: This Revision is preferred against the orders passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Medak, in I.A.No.805 of 2010 in O.S.No.51 of 2008. The said I.A., has been moved by the plaintiffs in the suit seeking directions to the Additional Revenue Divisional Officer (LR.II), Medak Division, to produce file in C.C.No. 594/ 595/ 596/597/NPR/75, dated 03-10-1992, with a further direction to produce the declaration made by Sri A.Damodar Reddy in C.C.No.594/NPR/75, the declaration of A. Papa Bai W/o late Sri A. Veera Reddy in C.C.No.595/NPR/75, the declaration of Sri A. Narasimha Reddy in C.C.No.597/NPR/75 and the declaration of Sri A. Santhavarma Reddy in C.C.No.597/NPR/75 and also summon the Additional Revenue Divisional Officer to tender his evidence in the matter. It will be appropriate, right at this stage, to notice that Sri A.Narayana Reddy S/o Late Sri Narasimha Reddy, R/o Annaram, was examined as PW-1 by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Medak on 02-06-2010. Through his deposition several documents have been got marked as Exs.A-1 to A-27. Of them, Ex.A-19 is the declaration of Sri A. Damodar Reddy in the land ceiling proceedings. Ex.A- 20 is the order passed by the Land Reforms Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal’) dated 21-02-1976 on the declaration Ex.A-19. Ex.A-21 is the declaration given by Smt. Papa Bai, while Ex.A-22 is the order passed by the Tribunal thereon on 21-02-1976. Similarly, Exs.A-23 and A-25 are the declarations filed before the Tribunal by Sri A. Narasimha Reddy and Sri A. Shantavarma Reddy respectively, while Exs.A-24 and A-26 are the orders passed by the Tribunal thereon. The final order passed by the Tribunal on 03-10-1992 is also marked as Ex.A-27. All these documents are marked and taken on record as evidence. The defendants have not objected to these documents exhibited by the plaintiffs. Therefore, there is no controversy that centers round these declarations and the order passed by the Tribunal thereon. The documents marked as exhibits, referred to supra, are all the certified copies. It is elementary principle of law that the contents of any document are not liable to be explained contrary to what is contained therein by way of oral evidence. Therefore, summoning the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is incharge of the Land Records is a redundant exercise. Equally, summoning the documents in original, certified copies of which have been already marked, is also a redundant exercise. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the learned Senior Civil Judge has not committed any error of jurisdiction in dismissing the I.A., warranting interference by me. I, therefore, do not see any justification to entertain this Revision and it is accordingly, dismissed at the admission stage. No costs. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J mrk 8th February 2011.