THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3632 of 2010 Dated:21.01.2011 Between: S.Sivaprakash. ...Petitioner And Y.Nageswara Rao And others. ...Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3632 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is the second defendant in O.S.No.1032 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Tirupathi. The suit is for injunction filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein. After completion of the evidence of the plaintiffs, D.W.1 was examined for the defendants. The Court below mandated that the defendant should complete the evidence by 30.10.2009. It could not be done. The defendants filed I.A.No.947 of 2009 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), seeking permission to produce D.W.2 as their witness. The Court below by impugned order, dated 30.06.2010, declined permission. This is assailed in this revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. This Court heard the Counsel for the petitioner and the Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. This Court also perused the affidavit filed by the petitioner/second defendant in support of the interlocutory application in the Court below. The delay in completion of the evidence as mandated by the Court below was attributed to the hospitalization of son of A.Lokanadham Reddy who was D.W.2. The Court below passed a laconic order and did not advert to any of the reasons alleged by the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court is not able to accept the said view of the Court below. It is well settled that in a proceedings the Court has to see that fairness is meted out to the parties. There is of course some delay on the part of defendants in adducing their evidence. That itself cannot be a ground to deny them fairness. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed on condition of the petitioner/second defendant paying a sum of Rs.750/- (Rupees seven hundred and fifty only) to the Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Ms.Madhavi Priya Manthena, immediately. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 21.01.2011 Note: Counsel for the petitioner Sri S.Subba Reddy paid a sum of Rs.750/- (Rupees seven hundred and fifty only) to Ms.Madhavi Priya Manthena in the Court itself. This is accordingly recorded. B/o. vs