THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.R.P. NO.5123 OF 2010 DATED: 24.11.2010 BETWEEN: Parana Farook and others .. Petitioners And Matturti Satyanarayana and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.R.P. NO.5123 OF 2010 ORDER: This revision petition is filed against the order dated 21.08.2010 passed by the Family Court cum Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram in I.A.No.1419 of 2010 in O.S.No.6 of 2009. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners. The respondents/defendants, after the evidence of both sides was closed before the learned trial Court filed applications to reopen the suit for further examination of PW.1 to recall and to mark certain documents. The said petitions were allowed by the learned trial Court. Feeling aggrieved, the respondents/defendants 1 to 3 therein filed the present revision petition. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners would submit that the petitions have been filed under wrong provision of law and they ought to have been filed under Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C and therefore, the learned trial Court ought to have dismissed the petitions. He would further submit that even according to Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. since the evidence of both sides was closed, the learned trial court ought not to have allowed the interlocutory applications at a belated stage. Therefore, he wants to set aside the order passed by the learned trial court. I have gone through the order passed by the learned trial Court which discloses that there was an issue framed in the suit as to whether the plaintiff has financial capacity to purchase the plaint schedule property and can pay the sale consideration. Now the plaintiff/respondent wants to file certain documents to prove his financial capacity to pay the sale consideration and considering all these facts which are relevant for exercising judicial discretion even under Order 7 Rule 14 C.P.C. the documents can be admitted in evidence with the leave of the Court at a later stage. In my considered view, the learned trial court has rightly exercised it’s discretion and the said order does not call for any interference in this revision. The civil revision petition is therefore, dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. ________________ Date: 24.11.2010 R. KANTHA RAO, J kvrm THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO C.R.P. NO.5123 OF 2010 DATED: 24.11.2010