THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY C.R.P.No.2858 of 2011 Date of Order: 05-08-2011 Between: Vallabaneni Venkateswara Rao ..Petitioner and M/s.CMR Transport contractors Pvt. Ltd. rep by its Managing Partner. ..Respondent The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY C.R.P.No.2858 of 2011 Oral order: Petitioner/defendant filed this revision aggrieved by the docket order passed in I.A.No.113 of 2011 in O.S.No.892 of 2008, dated 16-06-2011 wherein the I.A. filed to recall P.W.1 for cross- examination was allowed on condition of the petitioner depositing suit costs before the next date of hearing and proceed with the cross- examination of P.W.1 on 08-07-2011 on which date the suit stands posted. It is now represented that in the suit filed for recovery of Rs.7,91,955/- on the basis of invoice of the transportation of bulk Bitumen etc. P.W.1 filed his affidavit in lieu of chief examination on 18- 08-2010 for marking documents; on which date documents were marked and at the request of the defendant the matter was posted to 06-09-2010, 14-09-2010 and 21-09-2010 for cross-examination of P.W.1. In spite of granting three adjournments, petitioner/defendant has not proceeded with the cross-examination of P.W.1, as such the evidence of P.W.1 was closed and the matter was posted to 29-09- 2010 for further evidence of the plaintiff. From 29-09-2010, the petitioner took several adjournments, but did not adduce his evidence. As the defendant failed to adduce his evidence, the matter was adjourned on payment of costs. The defendant instead of adducing his evidence filed the impugned I.A. In view of the same, the lower court was right in imposing a condition that the petitioner should cross-examine P.W.1 on the next date of hearing. But as far as depositing of suit costs is concerned, in the absence of quantifying the costs, which can be done only on decreeing the suit, imposing condition for depositing the suit costs will amount to prejudging the issue. Having regard to the fact that amounts have already been secured in view of obtaining garnishee order by the plaintiff, imposition of condition for deposit of costs cannot be sustainable and it is accordingly set aside. Instead I.A. is allowed on condition of petitioner depositing costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the Legal Services Authority, Vijayawada on or before 11-08-2011 to which date suit stands posted and proceed with the cross-examination of P.W.1 and also files his evidence in the form of chief affidavit within one week thereafter i.e. 18-08-2011 and making himself available for cross-examination on the date fixed by the Court without any further notice from the Court, the petitioner/defendant is permitted to cross- examine P.W.1. The lower Court is directed to proceed with the suit without unnecessarily granting adjournments and dispose of the same expeditiously. Failure to comply any of the conditions IA stands dismissed. The civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. No costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. 05-08-2011 Note: Office to issue the order copy to the Counsel on Monday. (bo) Murthy