THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5022 of 2009 ORDER: The respondents filed O.S.No.84 of 2002 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Siddhout, against the petitioner for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The evidence on behalf of the respondents was closed. The evidence of the petitioner was in progress. However, on the ground that she did not turn up for cross-examination, the affidavit filed in lieu of chief examination was eschewed from consideration. Thereupon, she filed I.A.No.504 of 2008 with a prayer to reopen the evidence, for recalling her. That application was dismissed for default. The petitioner states that on account of the indifference shown by her earlier counsel, she has engaged another counsel and filed another application with a prayer to reopen the evidence for the purpose of adducing the evidence of V.R.O. The trial Court returned the application through order, dated 31.07.2009 on the ground that I.A.No.504 of 2008 was dismissed. The same is challenged in this revision. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court no doubt ordered notice to the respondents and the notice has not yet been retuned served. However, since the impugned order was not passed on merits, it is felt that the revision can be disposed of by issuing necessary direction to the trial Court. I.A.No.504 of 2008 was filed with a prayer to reopen the evidence to enable the petitioner to adduce her evidence. It is no doubt true that the said application was dismissed for default. The purpose of filing the present application is said to be to adduce the evidence of a different witness. Whether or not the request of the petitioner can be acceded to needs to be considered after hearing both the parties. The trial Court cannot refuse to number the application. Therefore, the civil revision petition is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. The trial Court is directed to number the application and dispose it of on merits after hearing both the parties. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 06.09.2010 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5022 of 2009 Date: 06.09.2010 JSU