IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.No.4393 OF 2010 Date:25.03.2011 Between:- Y.Mahipal Reddy and others ..Petitioners/respondents/defendants And G.Mahipal Reddy and others .. Respondents/petitioner/plaintiff and respondents/defendants ORDER:- This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 11.08.2010, in I.A.No.1028 of 2010 in O.S.No.783 of 2005 on the file of III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District, whereunder and whereby, the petition filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to receive the documents i.e., i) judgment in O.S.No.2904 of 2007 dated 27.02.2009 and ii) decree and order in I.A.No.4294 of 2007 in O.S.No.2904 of 2007, and mark them as exhibits in ‘X’ series, was allowed subject to proof and relevancy. 2. O.S.No.783 of 2005 was filed for declaration that respondent No.1/plaintiff is the lawful owner/title holder of the plaint schedule property, for perpetual injunction in favour of the plaintiff and to restrain the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3/defendants in interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, I.A.No.1028 of 2010 was filed to receive the certified copies of the above mentioned documents to mark them as exhibits. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants contended that in spite of raising many grounds in the counter not to receive the documents, the trial Court has not considered them and therefore, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. The grounds as mentioned in the counter are not tenable grounds so as to dismiss the petition. Rules 53 and 54 of Civil Rules of Practice have no application because a third party to the documents filed the affidavit to receive the documents. The allegations that those documents cannot be marked since the party, who filed the affidavit in support of the petition to receive the documents, is not a party to the documents and he is incompetent to file the above petition are totally devoid of merits in view of the fact that he sold the properties to both plaintiff and defendants and he wanted to mark those documents. As untenable contentions have been raised in the counter, they cannot be considered even now and there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. 5. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 25th March, 2011 AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.R.P.No.4393 OF 2010 Date:25.03.2011 AMD