IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH (14TH) DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRP No.2030 of 2008 Between: M/s Gollu Venkateswara Rao & Co. & 2 others … Petitioners And: Bhogavalli Rajeswara Rao & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRP No.2030 of 2008 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 09.04.2008 in IA No.1813 of 2004 in RCC No.11 of 1995 on the file of the Rent Controller, Tadepallegudem, wherein, the said application filed by the petitioners herein under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC for rejection of the petition, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The respondent herein filed RCC No.11 of 1995 for eviction of the petitioners/tenants from the petition schedule property on the grounds of willful default and also bona fide requirement for personal occupation. The petitioners/respondents filed counter contesting the petition. After full-fledged enquiry, the matter was posted for arguments. Arguments of the learned counsel for the respondents/ landlord were heard and the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners/tenants were being heard. At that stage, the petitioners/tenants filed the present application IA No.1813 of 2004 under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC for rejection of the RCC. The respondents/landlords filed counter opposing the said application. 4. As seen from the impugned order and also the fact that the eviction petition was filed in the year 1995, it is apparent that eviction proceedings had a long and checkered career. Finally when the matter was at the fag end of enquiry, the present application is filed. It is also seen from the impugned order that both the counsel appearing for the petitioners and respondents have submitted that the IA can be disposed of along with the main RCC, as the RCC is at the fag end of the trial and therefore, disposal of the application was not insisted for a period of two years and after arguments of the learned counsel for the respondents/landlords herein was completed, the counsel for the petitioners started insisting upon the disposal of this I.A. It is obvious from the impugned order that the petitioners/tenants have been trying to protract the matter at every stage without allowing the matter to be disposed of. It is open to the petitioners/tenants to canvass in their arguments in the main RCC, which is at the stage of hearing of their arguments the aspects which they have raised in the present application. 5. Having regard to the fact that the RCC was filed in the year 1995 and it had already undergone a checkered career and in view of the fact that the matter is at the stage of hearing the arguments, the learned Rent Controller is directed to dispose of the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. There are absolutely no merits in this petition. 6. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 14.03.2011 Note: Issue CC in one week (BO) bss