THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3501 of 2009 Date : 18.09.2009 Between: P.Punyavathi ......Petitioner AND D.Hari Priya ......Respondent The court made the following:- THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3501 of 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the order, dated 14.07.2009 passed in Tr.O.P.No.126 of 2009 on the file of Principal District Judge, Chittoor. The petitioner filed the said Tr.O.P.No.126 of 2009 under Sec.24 CPC seeking to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.1473 of 2005 pending on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tirupathi and to transfer the same to the file of V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupathi. It is stated that the petitioner herein filed O.S.No. 1086 of 2005 against K.Munikrishnaiah & D.Ramakrishna Reddy seeking a relief of permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property of an extent of Ac.3-00 cents of land bearing T.D.No.2420 in Sy.No.3/2C/2E2 situated at Tirupathi village, Tirupathi Mandal, Chittoor District. It is stated that the respondent herein also filed a suit in O.S.No.1473 of 2005 against the petitioner herein for grant of permanent injunction restraining the petitioner herein from interfering with her possession and enjoyment in respect of the house property bearing D.No.19-3-2/H/19 admeasuring East to West:60 feet and North to South:45 feet, situated at Ward No.19, in Sy.No.3/2C/2, Tirupati village, Chittoor District. It is stated that as the suit schedule property of the respondent which is a small plot and as the suit schedule property of the petitioner which is Ac.3-00 cents of land situated in the same survey number, therefore, the suit of the respondent requires to be transferred to the Court in which, the suit of the petitioner is pending. The pleadings in both the suits and extents are different and distinct and merely because the part of main survey number is tallying it cannot be said that the parties and the property is one and the same. The survey number mentioned in the suit of the petitioner is 3/2C/2E2 where as the survey number mentioned in the suit of the respondent is 3/2C/2. Therefore, independent evidence is required to be let in both the suits. In view of the above, I do not see any infirmity either legal or otherwise to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J September 18, 2009 Dsr/ Ivd