THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA C.R.P.No.4686 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: Heard both sides. 2. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 15.10.2008, passed by the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, dismissing the application in I.A.No.723 of 2008 in O.S.No.2391 of 2006, filed under Order XVIII Rule 16 C.P.C. seeking to recall P.W-1 for the purpose of further cross-examination, on behalf of the defendant, on Exs.B-2 to B-6. 3. The petitioner is the defendant and the respondent is the plaintiff in the said suit. 4. For the sake of convenience, in this order, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the suit. 5. The only grievance of the defendant is that the documents, which are relevant, were not permitted to be confronted on the plaintiff. Those documents are claimed to be the receipts issued by the plaintiff-landlord. 6. From a perusal of the impugned order, it appears, the said receipts, stated to have been issued by the plaintiff, were marked as Exs.B-3 to B-7, during the evidence of defendant. The trial Court arrived at the conclusion that no useful purpose would be served in recalling P.W-1 for further cross-examination, as in the cross-examination, the plaintiff denied the very fact of payment of the rent by the defendant for a certain period. 7. Therefore, in view of the said facts and circumstances of the case, I see no illegality or irregularity committed by the trial Court in dismissing the said application and accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed. 8. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 26th March 2010 dr