HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.665 of 2009 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order, dated 12-12- 2008, passed in E.P.No.67 of 2001 on the file of the Senior Civil Jude at Mahabubnagar whereby and whereunder the learned Senior Civil Judge over-ruled the objections raised by the petitioner with regard to the relief sought for by the 1st respondent herein in E.P.No.67 of 2001. The petitioner and the 1st respondent are brothers. Disputes between them with regard to partition of the family properties came to be referred to the Arbitrator who is the 2nd respondent in the C.R.P. The Arbitrator passed an interim Award on 08-08-1995. The 1st respondent herein filed O.P.No.388 of 1995 to make the interim Award as a Rule of Court under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The said O.P came to be allowed on 11-07-2000. Thereafter the 1st respondent filed E.P.No.67 of 2001 seeking the following relief:- “ that the Hon’ble court was pleased to allow the O.P filed by Petitioner and made the interim Award passed by Arbitrator as Rule of Court. As per Award the Respondent has to execute necessary Deed in respect of two Plots admeasuring 200 Sq.yards situated towards West and South West of Plot No.1 in which Shaik Bale Peeran has constructed residential house at Badepally in Sy.No.61/2 which is near to the house of Respondent. In spite of having knowledge regarding passing of award and Decree, the respondent is not obeying the award and Decree passed by this Hon’ble Court. The petitioner is entitled to get the Decree execute. It is therefore prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent to execute necessary Deed in Registered Sale Deed in respect of Petition schedule Property U/O.21 Rule 11(2) C.P.C.” The schedule as described in the E.P is as follows:- “Two Plots admeasuring 200 Sq.Yards situated towards West and south West of Plot No.1 in which Shaik Bale Peeran has constructed residential house at Badepally in Sy.No.61/1.” The petitioner-J.Dr filed objections in E.P., stating that it is the petitioner who has an option to execute sale deed in respect of one plot, which is to the South of Plot No.1, or two plots towards West and South West of plot No.1. The learned Senior Civil Judge, over-ruled the objections. The order passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge on 12-12-2008 reads as hereunder:- “Heard both. The objections filed are not tenable. The draft sale deed is approved. For filing stamp for registration, posted to 22-01-2009.” The said order is assailed in this revision. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 17-02- 2009. The respondent entered appearance through a counsel. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-J.Dr and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-D.Hr. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-J.Dr submits that it is option of the petitioner-J.Dr to execute sale deed in respect of one plot, which is to the South of plot No.1 or two plots towards West and South West of Plot No.1. The learned counsel refers the interim Award passed by the Arbitrator. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-D.Hr submits that the petitioner-J.Dr had already sold the plot admeasuring 200 Square Yards towards South of plot No.1 and therefore question of the petitioner exercising option does not arise. I have gone through the order impugned in the revision. The order is cryptic. No reasons have been assigned by the learned Senior Civil Jude for over-ruling the objections raised by the petitioner- J.Dr. Indeed the petitioner-J.Dr detailed the interim award and also consequent of the order passed in O.P.No.388 of 1995 in the counter filed by him in E.P. The learned Senior Civil Judge without referring to the objections taken in the counter filed by the petitioner-J.Dr, proceeded to make an observation that the objections are untenable. Since the order impugned in revision is not a reasoned order, I am of the view that the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order, dated 12-12-2008, remanding the matter back to the Senior Civil Judge at Mahaboobnagar to hear both the parties and pass appropriate orders. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J 14th February, 2011 VJL/SMR