THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5457 of 2009 (Dated : 21-12-2009) Between: Challa Aruna Devi W/o Raji Reddy …Petitioner A n d Thripurari Venkataramaiah and others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5457 of 2009 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 1.10.2009 passed in I.A.No.307 of 2009 in O.S.No.76 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge at Jangaon, whereby and whereunder the learned Junior Civil Judge allowed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 19 Rule 2 read with Section 151 CPC and summoned Chitla Laxmamma on payment of costs towards to-and-fro charges for cross-examination. 2. When the C.R.P came up for admission, the caveator, i.e., 1st respondent-plaintiff received notice. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the order impugned in the revision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is no contradiction in the sworn statement of Chitla Laxmamma and therefore, there is no need to summon her for cross-examination. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent-plaintiff supported the order impugned in the revision. 6. The 1st respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.76 of 2009. He filed third party affidavit of Chitla Laxmamma, who is aged about 80 years in I.A.No.307 of 2009. Thereupon, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.307 of 2009 under Order 19 Rule 2 read with Section 151 CPC to summon Chitla Laxmamma for cross- examination. The trial Court, by placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in case of Ali Bin Aifan[1], proceeded to allow the application filed by the plaintiff. In the cited case, a learned Single Judge of this Court has held: “ The provisions of Order 19 CPC are attracted to an application filed for a temporary injunction under Order 39 CPC and the Court has ample power to dispose of the matters on affidavits and the Court has also ample jurisdiction to summon the deponents of the affidavits for cross examination either suo motu where the Court desires that they should be cross examined or at the instance of a party if the court comes to the conclusion that the circumstances warrant the summoning of the deponents for cross examination.” 7. In view of the proposition laid down in the said decision, I do not see any flaw in the order impugned in the revision. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ____________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.21-12-2009 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.5457 of 2009 DATED : 21-12-2009 [1] AIR 1983 ANDHRA PRADESH 114