THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI C.R.P.No.5159 of 2009 ORDER This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 18-09-2009 passed in I.A.No.240 of 2009 in O.S.No.1698 of 2006 wherein the petition filed under Order 26, Rule 2 CPC read with Section 151 CPC seeking to summon the Liquidator of Prudential Co-operative Bank, R.P.Road, near Taj Mahal Hotel, Secunderabad to produce the original record pertaining to S.B. Account No.33286 of Malkajgiri Branch and to give evidence, was dismissed. Revision petitioner herein is the 1st defendant and 1st respondent herein is the plaintiff. Plaintiff filed the said suit against the defendants for recovery of money based on three promissory notes alleged to have been executed by the 1st defendant. On 3.5.2002, the plaintiff gave three cheques, which were en-cashed by the 1st defendant and that he executed three promissory notes. The said allegations were denied by the 1st defendant by filing a written statement. As the defendant failed to produce further evidence, the evidence of the defendants was closed and posted for arguments. At that stage, the impugned application is filed. The learned VI Senior Civil Judge, Hyderabad dismissed the said application. Questioning the same, the present civil revision petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner. A perusal of the material goes to show that previously the defendants filed similar application being I.A.No.202 of 2009 which was dismissed. The plaintiff already filed the S.B. account of the 1st defendant issued by the Branch Manager, Prudential Cooperative Bank, which was marked as Ex.A5. The defendant did not choose to cross-examine on this aspect. But, now the application for summoning the Liquidator for production of the S.B account of the 1st defendant would lead to draw an adverse inference against the defendant No.1 and that he wantonly filed the impugned application only to drag on the proceedings. The findings arrived at by the learned Judge needs no interference and they are perfectly justified. Hence, the civil revision petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. However, as the suit is of the year 2006, the Court below is directed to dispose of the suit within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. _________ 5-11-2009 rkk