IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5698 of 2008 Between: M.Annapurna ..... PETITIONER AND M.Vijaya Luke and 3 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5698 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is the 2nd plaintiff in the suit O.S.587/1999 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam and she is the mother of plaintiffs Nos.3 and 4. The 1st plaintiff died. The said suit was filed for ejectment of the respondents Nos.1 and 2 who are the tenants. The tenants are depositing the rent amount in the Court. The plaintiffs on record filed affidavits authorizing the 2nd plaintiff and permitting her to withdraw the amounts lying to the credit of the suit, payable to the plaintiffs. Earlier the Court below permitted the 2nd plaintiff to withdraw the deposited amounts by the tenants. It is stated that every time, the trial Court is insisting to file affidavits of all the plaintiffs and the petition filed under Rules-232 to 236 CPC in I.A.918/2008 for issuance of the cheque in favour of the 2nd plaintiff for a sum of Rs.79,741-33 ps lying to the credit of the suit and to deposit the said cheque in her bank account is dismissed by the impugned order dated 17.09.2008 on the ground that the plaintiffs have not filed affidavits authorizing the 2nd plaintiff to receive amounts. This Court while issuing notice before admission on 26.12.2008, directed the Court below to issue a cheque to the petitioner herein for the amount lying in the account of suit O.S.587/1999 without insisting the authorization affidavits every time. I am of the opinion that when the tenants and other plaintiffs have no objection to receive the deposited amounts by the petitioner/2nd plaintiff, there cannot be any justification on the part of the Court below in not issuing the cheque to the petitioner/2nd plaintiff pursuing to the earlier affidavits filed by her own two sons i.e. plaintiffs Nos.3 and 4, without insisting the authorization affidavits for every time. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the Civil Revision Petition is allowed, in terms of the interim orders dated 26.12.2008. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 03.12.2010 Dsr