THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO 7th August 2009 CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3495 of 2009 Between: Vupputala Venkateswarlu, S/o.Veera Venkaiah, 55 years,Plumber, D.No.16-23-94, Near Sivalayam, Old Guntur, Guntur, Guntur District. …PETITIONER AND Vemula Krishnaiah, S/o.Yelamanda, 75 years,R/o.Near Sivalayam, Old Guntur, Guntur, Guntur District. …RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3495 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri G.V.S.Meher Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.V.R.Krishna Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent and at their request, the revision itself is taken up for disposal. The petitioner filed this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), assailing the order dated 24.07.2009 in E.A.No.425 of 2009 in E.P.No.9 of 2004 in O.S.No.1489 of 1994 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, Guntur District, rejecting an application filed by him to summon the records in the Revenue office. The case of the petitioner is that he raised objection as to the said execution not permissible against such property and to substantiate the same, few documents are necessary. After considering various facts and circumstances, the Court below did not find favour and dismissed the said application. Hence, the revision. Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, admittedly, the petitioner has filed an application and it is pending consideration. However, in the affidavit filed in support of the application, it is the case of the petitioner that in spite of the steps taken as contemplated under the provisions of CPC, without making any exercise and getting the same straight away, as rightly held by the Court below, is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that on an earlier occasion, the objection as to any executability of the decree as against the assigned land has already been rejected and this Court dismissed C.R.P.No.1779 of 2008 on 13.01.2009. In view of the same, there is no error of jurisdiction to warrant interference with the order of the Court below. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) 7th August 2009 RRB