HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO C.R.P.Nos. 5918/2008, 1086/2009 AND 362/2009 DATE: 04-03-2011 C.R.P.No.5918 of 2008: Between: Smt. T. Ananda Bai ……….. Petitioner and C. Raja Rao and others ……… Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO C.R.P.Nos. 5918/2008, 1086/2009 AND 362/2009 COMMON ORDER: Heard both sides and at their request, the main Revision Petitions are being disposed of together at the stage of admission. The petitioner in all these three Revision Petitions is the plaintiff who invokes Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the common order, dated 13-10-2008 in dismissing the applications in I.A.Nos.494, 495 and 496 of 2008 in O.S.No.1534 of 2000 on the file of the IX Additional Senior Civil Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad, which were filed for reopening of the plaintiff’s evidence, for receipt of the documents and for recalling PW-1 respectively. Admittedly the suit is one of comprehensive in nature where cancellation of sale deed is sought for apart from consequential injunction. The present documents, which are now sought to be filed, are only municipal tax receipts which, according to the petitioner, are relevant on the question which has to be decided in the main suit itself. The Court below, however, did not find favour and dismissed the applications. Hence, the Revision Petitions. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material on record, it is to be seen that all these three applications ultimately concern about receipt of two documents i.e., municipal tax receipts, which are public documents, and there cannot be any doubt as such. The applications filed to reopen the plaintiff’s evidence and to recall PW-1 are only formal one. There cannot be any dispute in regard to the correctness of the documents. Therefore, opportunity should have been provided by Court below. The Civil Revision Petitions are, accordingly, allowed. The common order, dated 13-10-2008 in I.A.Nos.494, 495 and 496 of 2008 passed by the Court below is set aside. Consequently I.A.Nos.494, 495 and 496 of 2008 shall stand allowed. No order as to costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J Date: 04-03-2011 YCR