THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3897 OF 2007 DT.17.06.2010 Between: Smt.Munipalli Savitri ….Petitioner Vs. M.V.Seetha Devi and four others. ……………Respondents. O R D E R: Heard Smt.P.Revathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri T.S.Anand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The petitioner herein who is applicant before the court below seeks to invoke Section 22 of Andhra Pradesh Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, inter alia, seeking to assail the order passed in E.A.No.1009 of 2007 in E.A.No.788 of 2007 in E.P.No.263 of 2006 in R.C.C.No.33 of 1987, dated 13.08.2007 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Tenali, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order 18 Rule 17 and Section 151 C.P.C., seeking to recall the court witness i.e., D.V.S.R.C.Murthy-Field Assistant, who is stated to be the executant of the warrant of delivery issued by the court below for further cross-examination on behalf of the petitioner to identify the articles mentioned in the list of inventory filed by the petitioner into court was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has not filed the list of articles to be compared with the inventory and no specific reasons are assigned by her for further cross examination of the witness. Hence, the present revision is filed. After hearing both the learned counsel and on perusing the material placed before this court, it is apparent that the petitioner has already examined the Field Assistant, who is said to be a court witness and who is said to have executed the warrant. Hence, I am not inclined to interfere with the order of the court below. The revision petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, it is always open for the petitioner to establish her claim in respect of the articles, as per the record submitted by the Field Assistant. No order as to costs. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO J., Dt.17.06.2010 tjs