THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.Nos.2761, 3216 and 3416 of 2011 COMMON ORDER: These three revisions are between the same parties and arise out of the same suit. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. Respondents 1 to 6 herein filed O.S.No.37 of 2005 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala against the petitioner and respondents 7 to 21 for the relief of perpetual injunction. The trial of the suit commenced and the evidence on behalf of the defendants is being recorded. The petitioner and the rest of the defendants viz., respondents 7 to 21 filed I.A.Nos.347, 348 and 349 of 2011 for the reliefs of reopening of the suit, recalling of D.W.1 and receiving certain documents. It was pleaded that respondents 1 to 6 based their claim on the assignment of the land by the authorities of the Revenue Department and that during the pendency of the suit, several orders came to be passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Joint Collector and the Chief Commissioner for Land Revenue. It was also pleaded that the filing of those documents is essential for the effective adjudication of the suit. The applications were opposed by respondents 1 to 6. Through separate orders, dated 13.04.2011, the trial Court dismissed all the applications. Hence, these three revision. Heard Smt. A.Varalakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri T.Rama Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 6. The suit is no doubt of the year 2005 and it has been identified for disposal. The fact however remains that the evidence of D.W.1 is in progress and at that stage, the applications were filed. The petitioner is not a party to those documents and it naturally took time for him and the other defendants in the suit to obtain the copies thereof. The documents, which are sought to be filed, are in relation to the suit schedule property. Therefore, they are relevant and needed for effective adjudication of the suit. No prejudice would be caused to respondents 1 to 6, in case the documents are received. Therefore, the civil revision petitions are allowed and the orders under revisions are set aside. As a result, I.A.Nos.347, 3489 and 349 of 2011 are allowed as prayed for. There shall bed no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:21.09.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.Nos.2761, 3216 and 3416 of 2011 Date: 21.09.2011 JSU