THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1271 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners herein filed S.R.O.P.No.32 of 2008 on the file of the VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Guntur. In the said pending O.P., the petitioners herein filed I.A.No.224 of 2008 to grant ad- interim injunction restraining the respondents herein from interfering with the activities of the 1st petitioner-Bible Mission in any manner either by representing the 1st petitioner-Bible Mission or claiming anything on behalf of the 1st petitioner-Bible Mission or conducting any programme or meeting in the name of the 1st petitioner-Bible Mission, pending disposal of the O.P. The court below, after hearing both sides and after considering the various documents filed by both the parties, passed an elaborate order on 29-01-2010, the operative portion of which reads as follows :- “In the result, both the parties are directed to get ready with the enquiry in main O.P.No.32/08. Further, under the facts and circumstances of the matter discussed supra, petitioners 2 to 11 are directed to submit to the Court the statements of account relating to the income generated from all sources and the total expenditure incurred for the annual conventions held during the years 2009 and 2010 on or before 15-02-2010. The respondents 1 to 12 are also directed to submit to the Court the statements of account relating to the income generated from all sources and the total expenditure incurred for the annual conventions held during the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 on or before 15-02-2010. With the above said directions, this Interlocutory Application is disposed of. Each party to bear their own costs.” Aggrieved thereby, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. The said order was passed one and half year back and this Civil Revision Petition was neither admitted nor any notice has been issued. However, when it came up for admission on 15-07-2011, as there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners, it was directed to be posted under the caption “for dismissal” on 22-07-2011. On 22-07-2011, at the request of the petitioners, the matter was adjourned to today. Today, a representation has been made on behalf of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeking adjournment. But, however, I am not inclined to grant any adjournment. I have perused the impugned order. I am of the opinion that the court below, having considered the balance of convenience and keeping in view the interest of both the parties, passed the impugned order. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the court below. In the impugned order, the learned Judge directed both the parties to get ready with an enquiry in the main O.P. itself. However, the petitioners instead of pursuing main O.P., filed this Civil Revision Petition without evincing any interest. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 29-07-2011 Prv