HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.N.RAO NALLA C.M.A.No. 1951 of 2001 DATED: 22.04.2010 Between: B. Amarender Reddy .. Petitioner And K. Manjula Reddy B. Ravinder Reddy .. Respondents JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 18.07.2001 made in I.A. No. 529 of 2001 in O.P. No. 473 of 2001, whereby the learned Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, directed the appellant and the 2nd respondent herein to produce the minor children namely, Sreeja Reddy and Sreetej Reddy before the Court on 31.07.2001 at 10.30 A.M. without fail. The appellant, who is brother of the 2nd respondent herein, preferred the C.M.A. The 1st respondent herein, who is the wife of the 2nd respondent herein, filed O.P. No.473 of 2001 seeking custody of the minor children. Pending disposal of the O.P., she filed an application in I.A. No.529 of 2001 seeking temporary custody of the minor children, and the trial Court, by order dated 18.07.2001 in I.A. No. 529 of 2001 directed the 2nd respondent and the appellant, who is the brother of the 2nd respondent, to produce the minor children before the Court on 31.07.2001 at 10.30 a.m. without fail. Heard the learned counsel for the both the parties and perused the material placed on record. From a perusal of the record, it is clear that the trial Court only directed production of the minor children, maybe, so as to enable the Court to interview and find out the will and wish of the minor children and their best interest. Merely because the minor children are directed to be produced before the Court, it cannot be said that the rights of the parents over the minor children have been affected in any way. The trial Court has not passed any orders determining the rights over the minor children either in favour of the 2nd respondent-husband or the 1st respondent-wife. However, inasmuch as the impugned order is only an interim order passed for the purpose of conducting enquiry, and the application is not disposed of on merits, and the learned counsel for the appellant is unable to state whether O.P. No. 473 of 2001 is pending adjudication, we do not see any legal infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference from this Court. Hence, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal fails, and the same is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ V. ESWARAIAH,J 22nd April, 2010 ________________ B.N.RAO NALLA, J bcj