THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2719 OF 2010 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 30.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.137 of 2010 in A.S.No.59 of 2008 on the file of the Family Court-cum-Additional District Court, Nalgonda whereby and where under the learned additional District Judge dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Order XLI Rule 27 r/w Section 151 CPC. The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.91 of 2006. Respondents 1 to 3 herein are the defendants in the said suit. It is the case of the petitioner-plaintiff that his father Lakshmi Narasimha Reddy, after the death of his first wife Lakshmamma married Kousalya as second wife and respondents 1 and 2 herein are the sons of said Kousalya through his father. According to him, the suit schedule properties are the joint family properties and therefore, he is entitled to have ½ share in the plaint A & B schedule properties. The defendants filed counter resisting the claim of the plaintiffs. It is pleaded by the second defendant in the written statement that earlier a suit being O.S.No.316/93 had been filed for partition of the selfsame properties and the said suit ended in compromise and consequently preliminary decree was passed on 28.10.1993. The trial Court on considering the evidence brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, proceeded to dismiss the suit. Assailing the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.91 of 2006, the plaintiff filed the appeal being A.S.No.59 of 2008 on the file of the Family Court – cum – Additional District Court, Nalgonda. He also moved I.A.No.137 of 2010 under Order XLI Rule 27 r/w Section 151 CPC to receive the proceedings dated 16.08.2007 in respect of the payment of compensation for 26.40 hectors as additional evidence. The second respondent-second defendant filed counter resisting the said application. The lower appellate Court on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel of the parties came to the conclusion that the petitioner- appellant failed to satisfy the conditions specified under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC and thereby proceeded to dismiss the application by order dated 30.04.2010. Hence this revision. Heard the counsel appearing for the petitioner, perused the material brought on record. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Survey No.927 is the joint family property and part of it has been acquired by the Reliance Gas Corporation and compensation has been paid to the petitioner herein and therefore, the said proceedings are essential for proper conclusion in the appeal. I have gone through the affidavit filed in support of the petition in I.A.No.137 of 2010. For better appreciation, I extract the affidavit, which reads as hereunder: “AFFIDAVIT FILED UNDER SECTION 139 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE I, Ravula Gopal Reddy S/o. Laxminarasimha Reddy, Age: 60 years, Oc: Agriculture, R/o.Pallepahad village of Narketpally Mandal, Nalgonda District, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state on oath as follows: 1. I am the deponent herein and appellant in the above appeal as such I am well acquainted with the facts of the case. 2. That I am filing proceedings of file No.Ammanabole/927, dated 16.08.2007 presented by Sri Bucha Reddy, M.A.LL.B., who is the competent authority of petroleum and minerals pipe line acquisition(Land using of right acquisition), Act, 1962. The said proceedings is very essential to decide the appeal, further I am filing sketch map of the appeal suit land at the time of trial. 3. That the Hon’ble Court has got ample powers to receive the above documents as additional evidence, otherwise I will be put to an irreparable loss and hardship that cannot be compensated in any other manner. 4. In view of the above stated facts and circumstances, I pay the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to receive the above documents as additional evidence in my above appeal which are very essential and just and necessary to prove my appeal, in the interest of Justice. The above stated facts are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Deponent Sd/- x x x x x x.” Nothing is stated in the affidavit that the compensation paid by the Reliance Corporation is in respect of the part of the land in Sy.No.927. Even the averments in the plaint do not disclose that any part of the plaint schedule land has been acquired by the Corporation. In the absence of such particulars, it cannot be said that the proceedings dated 16.08.2007 issued by the competent authority, are essential for proper adjudication of the issues involved in the appeal. Lower appellate Court considered the material brought on record and dismissed the application filed by the appellant under Order XLI Rule 27 by giving cogent and convincing reasons. I do not see any irregularity or illegality in the order passed by the lower appellate Court warranting interference of this Court in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:02-08-2010 Rns