HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA C.R.P.No.1572 of 2011 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order of the learned V-Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupathi dated 31.03.2011 dismissing I.A.No.302 of 2011 in O.S.No.420 of 2006 filed by the plaintiff, who is the revision petitioner herein. The petitioner-plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit against the respondent-defendant for permanent injunction. In the said suit, evidence on both sides was closed and the matter is coming up for arguments. At that stage, the petitioner-plaintiff filed the present I.A.No.302 of 2011 to reopen the suit for the purpose of marking the document i.e., registration copy of the sale deed No.3213/1971 dated 25.08.1971 executed by the elder brother of the respondent-defendant, in which the defendant is the attestor, and also for leading further evidence on his behalf. The respondent-defendant contested the said application by filing counter inter alia contending that the petitioner-plaintiff filed the present petition only to drag on the case without any justification. The trial Court, on a consideration of the entire material available on record, dismissed the said application by order dated 31.03.2011. It is against this order, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the document in question is a public document relating to purchase of Ac.0.04 cents of land out of schedule land by the petitioner-plaintiff from the elder brother of the respondent-defendant and that the said document is very much essential to prove the title of the petitioner-plaintiff over part of the schedule land. He further submits that the petitioner-plaintiff came to know of the document in question only after the evidence on both sides was closed and when the suit was posted for arguments and, therefore, he wants to re-open the suit for the purpose of marking the said document and for leading further evidence on his behalf. Learned Counsel for the respondent-defendant, while supporting the impugned order of the trial Court, contends that in the suit, evidence on both sides was closed and the suit was posted for arguments and therefore, re-opening of the suit for the purpose of marking the document in question at this stage does not arise. I have perused the order under revision. The suit is of the year 2006. In the said suit, evidence on both sides was closed long back and the matter was posted for arguments. At this stage, if the suit is reopened for marking the document in question and for further evidence on behalf of the plaintiff, there will be further delay in disposal of the suit. The petitioner-plaintiff filed the present application only to drag on the proceedings. There are no justifiable reasons to reopen the suit at this belated stage for marking the document in question. Therefore, this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the order of the trial Court, which has given cogent and convincing reasons for dismissing the present application, filed by the petitioner-plaintiff. The impugned order does not suffer from any material irregularity or illegality. I find no merit in this revision and the Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ______________________ JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA 29.07.2011 Gsn.