THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO 7th August 2009 CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2556 of 2009 Between: Sunke Bhavani, W/o.Koteswara Rao, Hindu, 30 years, R/o.D.No.26- 14-2/B, C/o.K.Mohana Rao, Retired Lecturer, Nagarampalem, Guntur- 4. …PETITIONER AND Sunke Koteswara Rao, S/o.China Kotilanga, Hindu, 43 years, Junior Engineer, RWS, Panchayat Raj Department, R/o.1/17 Brodipet, Guntur. …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2556 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner-wife files this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the order dated 14.05.2009 in I.A.No.361 of 2009 in H.M.O.P.No.27 of 2008 on the file of the Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Guntur, rejecting her application filed to recall P.W.1 for further cross examination. The case of the petitioner, in short, is that having regard to the change of the counsel, who has not taken proper care in prosecuting the case, certain events have not been confronted to the respondent- husband in the cross examination and as such, recalling him for further cross examination necessarily arises. The Court below did not find favour with the petitioner-wife especially in view of the fact that the matter underwent several adjournments and even subsequently also, evidence has been let in on her behalf and therefore, question of recalling does not arise and dismissed the application. Hence, the revision. Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, it does not show any valid justification for seeking such indulgence at this late hour. Admittedly, several adjournments have been taken place and merely because of change of counsel, no ground would be created to recall the witness or reopen the matter. In the circumstances, I do not find any warrant to interfere with the order impugned. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) 7th August 2009 RRB