HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 5039 OF 2009 Friday, the thirtieth day of October, Two Thousand and Nine Between Mrs. N.Vijaya Lakshmi Petitioner AND Mrs. N.Anuradha and another Respondents THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI C.R.P. NO. 5039 OF 2009 ORAL ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the defendant in O.S. No. 299 of 2009 aggrieved by the order dated 13.10.2009 made in IA No. 3552 of 2009, by the learned III Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, allowing the petition permitting the plaintiff to examine the witness one Sri Nanduri Seethapathy, as PW-1, who was claimed to be on death-bed. The respondents herein filed the above suit for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. It is case of the respondents herein that the witness Nanduri Seethapathi, who is the natural father of first respondent’s husband is aged 89 years and due to advanced age, he is on bed. It is also their case that the said witness had executed a Registered Will on 21.6.2008, bequeathing his property to his second son N.Rangacharulu and in the said Will, the witness had stated that the husband of first respondent was given in adoption to his brother Sri Nanduri Laxminarasimha Charyulu. Therefore, the examination of the said witness, dispensing with the other steps in the matter, is essential. The court below, by the order impugned, has allowed the petition as stated supra. Aggrieved thereby, the defendant in the above suit, preferred this revision petition inter alia contending that the court below erred in spontaneously allowing the petition contrary to the averments of the affidavit that the said witness is hale and healthy and in a sound state of mind and that too at the stage when the suit is coming up for filing written statement and without giving putting the petitioner on notice. A bare reading of the order impugned does not show that the petitioner was put on notice before passing the impugned order, which is all the more necessary when dispensing of other steps and advance examination of the witness is sought in the petition apart from the fact that the said witness is admitted to be hale and healthy by the first respondent herself in the affidavit. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order impugned herein and remanding the matter back to the court below for passing orders afresh, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the petitioner herein, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari October 30, 2009 MAS