IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5268 OF 2008 Between: Moku Narsimha Reddy and others .....PETITIONERS AND Narra Madhusudhan Reddy and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5268 OF 2008 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the docket order, dated 12.11.2008, in O.S.No.29 of 2006, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, whereunder and whereby, the documents filed by PW.3 – witness, who was summoned to give evidence on behalf of the respondent No.1/plaintiff, in support of his evidence were received by the trial Court. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that these documents have not been listed in the plaint; and that there is no provision under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short, “C.P.C.”) for production of documents through witness and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 contended that under Order XVI Rule 7 C.P.C., the Court can direct any person to produce the documents or to give evidence and hence, the impugned order cannot be said to be illegal or incorrect and hence, prays to dismiss the revision petition. 4. PW.3 was summoned by the trial Court to give evidence on behalf of respondent No.1/plaintiff. At the time of cross-examination, he filed some documents. Other side raised objections to receive the documents, as PW.3 is not a party and he is only a witness. Regarding admissibility and receiving of documents, the trial court asked PW.3 to file those documents with memo after issuing notice to other side. He filed a memo stating that his evidence is based upon certain documents. Therefore, these documents are necessary for the purpose of his evidence. The relevancy or admissibility of those documents can be decided at subsequent stage. Hence, the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmities so as to call for interference by this Court. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J March 15, 2010 MD/YVL