THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO C.R.P.Nos. 5435 and 5456 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: Since both the civil revision petitions are between the same parties, they are taken up together for disposal. In these two revisions, the petitioner, who is a landlord is aggrieved by the orders, dated 24.09.2010 passed by the Principal Rent Controller, Secunderabad, in I.A.No. 357 of 2010 in R.C.No. 61 of 2010 and I.A.No. 358 of 2010 in R.C.No. 62 of 2010 rejecting the applications purported to have been filed under Rule 7(5) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules, read with Section 151 C.P.C., whereby she sought to produce some documents. The Court below while going into the merits and considering the aspect of relevancy, etcetera, sought to reject the same. Hence, these two revisions. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and having perused the entire material available on record, it is to be seen that in an application of this nature, where the request is only for production of some documents, the question of going into merits does not arise. Necessarily, all such documents have to be received only subject to proof and relevancy. It is always open to the respondent to raise all objections, which they can at the time of marking in the process of recording of evidence. Subject to above, the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed. No costs. ------------------------------- (B. PRAKASH RAO, J) 27th April 2011 ksld