THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5788 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: Heard learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. 2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order, dated 29.09.2009, passed by the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Vijayawada, dismissing the application I.A.No.229 of 2009 in O.S.No.378 of 2001, filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to reopen the evidence of the plaintiff for the purpose of cross- examination of P.Ws.1 to 3. 3. Petitioner is the second defendant and respondents 1 and 2 are the plaintiffs and respondents 3 to 5 are the other defendants in the suit. 4. For the sake of convenience, in this order, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the suit. 5. The impugned order, passed by the Court below, speaks volumes about the conduct of the second defendant in prosecuting the said suit. Every minute detail had been incorporated in the impugned order and what had transpired on each and every adjournment had been categorically recorded by the Court below. On all the occasions, it appears that the second defendant did not evince any interest in prosecuting the case and was simply trying to drag on the proceedings. Further, at least, on a couple of occasions costs were also imposed, despite which, there was no progress in the matter from the side of the second defendant. Apart from that, even the Commissioner, who was appointed to record the cross-examination of P.W-1, returned the warrant for want of co-operation from the learned counsel appearing for the second defendant. 6. Therefore, having regard to the detailed facts and circumstances of the case that were incorporated in the impugned order, passed by the Court below, which reflects the negligent attitude of the second defendant in prosecuting the said suit, I am of the view that no further interference is called for by this Court, in this matter. 7. For the foregoing reasons, the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 12th March 2010 dr