THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA C.R.P. No. 3137 of 2010 O r d e r: This C.R.P. is directed against the order dated 08.07.2010, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District, dismissing the application in I.A. No. 545 of 2010 in O.S. No. 32 of 1991, filed by the petitioner-plaintiff praying to re-open the case and recall P.W.1 for marking documents. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-plaintiff and the learned counsel for the respondents-defendants and perused the order under revision. The petitioner earlier filed application in I.A. No. 186 of 2007 for summoning defendant No.1 for the purpose of confronting the statement said to have been made defendant No.1 in his earlier deposition. The said application, along with two other applications, was dismissed by common order dated 26.02.2007. Questioning the said common order, the petitioner filed C.R.P. Nos. 1195, 1643 and 1644 of 2007, which were dismissed by this Court by order dated 28.03.2007. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed S.L.P. Nos. 10914- 10916 of 2007, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, by order dated 16.07.2007, dismissed the same. Thus, the petitioner could not succeed in his attempt to summon defendant No.1 for confronting his earlier statement. Admittedly, defendant No.1, died during the pendency of the suit. The petitioner having failed in his attempt to summon defendant No.1 for confronting his earlier statement, now filed the present application, to mark the very same though himself, which cannot be permitted. This apart, the petitioner filed the present application after lapse of three years after his application for summoning defendant No.1 for marking his earlier statement, was dismissed, as confirmed by this Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court. This apart, as can be seen from the order under revision, the suit is at the stage of arguments, the petitioner instead of submitting oral arguments, sought time to file written arguments on 01.07.2010, and again on that day he took time to file the arguments positively by 08.07.2010. The petitioner instead of filing his arguments on the said day, filed the present application along with two other applications, and the Court below by reason of the order under revision dismissed the same. The suit admittedly is of the year 1991, and considering the stage at which the petitioner filed the present application long after closure of evidence and after undertaking to file written arguments, clearly indicates that he wants to drag on the suit, which cannot be permitted. For the foregoing reasons, this Court finds no reason whatsoever to interfere with the order under revision in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the C.R.P. is dismissed. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 13th August, 2010 KSR