HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITIONS No:1642 & 5843 OF 2010 Dated: 24.12.2010 Between: 1. Atluri Madhava Rao and others. ..Petitioners And 1. Gogineni Seshu Kumar and others. .. Respondents This Court made the following HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITIONS No:1642 & 5843 OF 2010 COMMON ORDER: Since the issue involved in both the revisions is one and the same, these revisions are being disposed of by this Common order. Both the revisions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to revise the orders dated 24.2.2010 passed in I.A.Nos.52 & 53 of 2010 passed in O.S.No.554 of 2001 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District. The petitioners are defendants and the respondents are plaintiffs in the suit. The defendants filed the above two I.As., under Section 151 and under Order 18 Rule 17 CPC seeking to reopen the matter and to recall P.W.1 for continuation of cross-examination respectively, on the ground that on 9.2.2010, when the matter was called, their Counsel could not attend as he was engaged in Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Gudivada and there is no intention of dragging on the matter. The Court below having observed that only with a view to obtain adjournment and cause inconvenience to P.W.1, the defendants did not get ready for cross-examination and there are no merits in the petition to reopen and recall P.W.1, dismissed the applications. Aggrieved by the same, the present revisions have been filed. Heard. Perused the material available on record. The respondents-plaintiffs filed the present suit for the relief of permanent injunction against the petitioners-defendants to restrain them from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property. It is the case of the petitioners-defendants that as their Counsel was engaged in Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, he could not attend before the Court below and they have no intention to drag on the matter. Since the suit is of the year 2001, the petitioners-defendants are not justified in seeking adjournment time and again. For one reason or the other, the matter has been dragged. But, that does not mean that the petitioners cannot be afforded an opportunity to cross examine P.w.1. Apart from that, the issue involved in the suit is to be adjudicated on its own merits but not on mere technicalities. In this view of the matter and in view of the reasons explained by the petitioners-defendants and in the interest of justice, it is just and proper to grant one more opportunity to the petitioners-defendants to cross-examine P.W.1 but subject to condition of the petitioners- defendants paying costs of Rs.1,000/- to the District Legal Services Authority concerned, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such payment, the impugned I.As shall stand allowed, in default, both the Civil Revision Petitions shall stand dismissed. The Civil Revision Petitions are allowed as indicated above. No order as to costs. It is needless to observe that on payment of costs as stated above, the Court below shall issue summons to P.W.1 and proceed with the proceedings in the suit. The Court below is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. _____________________ Justice A. Gopal Reddy Dated: 24.12.2010 Nn HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITIONS No:1642 & 5843 OF 2010 24.12.2010