IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5345 OF 2007 DATED:03.12.2010 Between: K. Sai Babu … Petitioner And State Bank of India Region IV, Bank Street, Hyderabad Rep. by its Assistant General Manager … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.5345 OF 2007 ORDER: The petitioner, who is defendant No.1 in the suit, invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the correctness of the order dt.24.10.2007 passed by the VI Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in I.A. SR. No.8716 of 2007 in O.S. No.538 of 1992, in rejecting the application filed by him at the SR stage itself, wherein he sought permission to cross-examine P.W.5 without conducting any identification parade with the witness. The respondent herein is the plaintiff. It filed the suit – O.S. No.538 of 1992 on the file of the VI Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the petitioner and some others, for recovery of amount. At the stage of examination of witnesses, the petitioner herein filed I.A. (SR) No.8716 of 2007 to permit him to cross-examine P.W.5 without conducting any identification parade with the witness. The Court below rejected the I.A. (SR) by taking into account the fact that the Court had already directed that defendant No.1 to be present before the Court for identification by P.W.5 and that the defendant No.1 was accused in a criminal case. Hence, this revision. During the course of the arguments, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the criminal case C.C. No.14 of 1995, wherein the petitioner – defendant No.1 was shown as accused, was already disposed of by the Court of Special Judge for C.B.I. Cases, Hyderabad, on 21.1.2003 and the petitioner was acquitted and this fact was not brought to the notice of the Court below. In that view of the matter, as the petitioner was acquitted in the above said criminal case and as the said fact was not brought to the notice of the Court below, the matter requires reconsideration by the Court below by keeping in view the said fact. The Civil Revision Petition is therefore allowed. The impugned order dt.24.10.2007 passed by the Court of VI Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in I.A. SR. No.8716 of 2007 in O.S. No.538 of 1992, is set aside, and the matter is remanded back to the Court below for fresh disposal on merits after giving notice to both the parties. No costs. _______________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J 03.12.2010 bnr