THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3037 OF 2007 AND 3256 OF 2007 COMMON ORDER: C.R.P.No.3037 of 2007, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 29.07.2007, in I.A.No.322 of 2007 in O.S.No.54 of 2002, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Narsapur, whereunder and whereby, the petition, filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to re-open the case, was dismissed. 2. C.R.P.No.3256 of 2007, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 29.07.2007, in I.A.No.323 of 2007 in O.S.No.54 of 2002, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Narsapur, whereunder and whereby, the petition, filed under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to take signatures of respondent No.2/plaintiff No.2 in open Court and send the same along with Ex.B19 – Agreement, on which respondent No.2 had put her thumb impression, to Finger Print Expert for comparison and opinion, was dismissed on the ground that it was filed at belated stage. 3. The suit was filed for grant of injunction simplicitor in respect of the agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0-36 guntas situated in Narsapur Village of Medak District. Plaintiffs’ evidence was closed and DW.1 was examined. Thereafter, DW.1 did not produce any further evidence. Defendants’ side evidence was also closed and the matter was posted for arguments. At that stage, the present applications were filed. 4. It is stated that the parties have settled their dispute amicably in the presence of village elders and in pursuance of the settlement, a location map was scribed and that respondent No.2 had put her thumb impression on Ex.B19 agreeing for settlement. During the course of cross-examination, the thumb impression is denied by PW.1. It is not known whether the petitioners have taken such a plea in the written statement. Affidavit filed by the petitioners in support of the petition is silent on the aspect of taking such plea. There cannot be any dispute that in order to get permanent injunction, the plaintiffs have to establish that (1) they had got right and title in property (ii) they were in possession and enjoyment of property by the date of suit and that balance of convenience or irreparable injury is in their favour. The petitioners must prima facie show as to how the document in question is relevant for the issue involved in the suit. The document now sought to be sent to the expert has some bearing in deciding the issue. Such relevancy has not been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition. However, if the petitioners want to prove the document by examining the village elders, if they are parties to the document, they are at liberty to do so. Therefore, insofar as the order in I.A.No.323 of 2007 in O.S.No.54 of 2002 is concerned, the order of the trial Court is confirmed and I.A.No.322 of 2007 in O.S.No.54 of 2002, to re-open the suit permitting the petitioners to adduce further evidence, is concerned, the order of the trial Court is set aside and the application is allowed as the trial Court has not given reasonable opportunity to adduce further evidence on behalf of the petitioners/defendants. 5. Accordingly, C.R.P.No.3037 of 2007 is allowed and C.R.P.No.3256 of 2007 is dismissed. Since the suit is of the year 2002, the petitioners/defendants shall adduce and complete their evidence, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the trial Court shall dispose of the suit within a period of one month from the closing of evidence on petitioners/defendants’ side. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J December 09, 2010 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3037 OF 2007 AND 3256 OF 2007 C.R.P.No.3037 of 2007: Between: Jeedimetla Narsimulu and others .....PETITIONERS AND Jeedimetla Sathaiah and others ....RESPONDENTS C.R.P.No.3256 of 2007: Between: Jeedimetla Narsimulu and others .....PETITIONERS AND Jeedimetla Sathaiah and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3037 OF 2007 AND 3256 OF 2007 December 09, 2010