THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.4045 and 5048 of 2009 29.1.2010 Between: Pala Naga Bhaskari, W/o.Satyanarayana And others ... Petitioners AND Deepika Chits Pvt Ltd., represented by its Director A.Sivarama Prasad, S/o.Bala Krishna Murthy ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.4045 and 5048 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: These two revision petitions arise out of common order dated 10.7.2009 in I.A.Nos.584 and 585 of 2009 in O.S.No.519 of 1998 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tanuku. The applications filed by petitioners to reopen and recall P.W.1 for cross-examination were dismissed by the Court below, aggrieved by which, these civil revision petitions are filed. The sole respondent instituted the suit for recovery of chit amount. The suit which appears to have been dismissed twice for default was restored. P.W.1 was examined and defendants sought time for cross-examination. Ultimately on 18.6.2009, the Court passed an order forfeiting right to cross-examine P.W.1 and the matter was posted for arguments closing the defendants’ evidence. At that stage, applications were filed for recalling P.W.1 and reopening the case for cross-examination of P.W.1 and leading evidence. Learned Counsel for petitioners/defendants submits that valid reasons are shown by petitioners and, therefore, the Court below ought to have granted opportunity to petitioners. This Court is not able to countenance the submission. As seen from the order of Court below, time was extended thrice for cross-examination of P.W.1 and that without leading rebuttal evidence in support of the plea of discharge they filed the applications. It was also observed that period during which P.W.1 was in judicial custody was not specifically mentioned in the affidavit. After perusing the order and noticing the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of considered opinion that the petitioners did not evince proper interest in prosecuting their case and, therefore, the Court cannot go on extending time and go on reopening the case. This Court does not find any error warranting interference. The civil revision petitions are accordingly dismissed. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO,J) January 29, 2010 YS