THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1707 OF 2010 DT.30.04.2010 Between: Shaik Fazullulah ……………..Petitioner/defendant Vs. Puvvada Ramadevi ………….Respondent/plaintiff O R D E R: This revision petition is filed aggrieved against the notice, dated 03.04.2010 issued in O.S.No.162 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, calling upon both the parties to file certified copy of pronote, if obtained by them, into the court. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the court below should have informed both the parties as to the admission of the very said document, even prior to issuing such a notice. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material placed before this court, I am of the opinion that the court below issued the said notice in pursuance of an enquiry and it cannot be said to be a conclusive attempt on the part of the court below. Hence, I think that it would be just and proper to leave it open to the petitioner to raise all the objections with regard to the re-construction of any document whatsoever, which will be considered by the court below while passing appropriate orders. I do not find any merit in the revision petition. The revision petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ B.PRAKASH RAO J., Dt.30.04.2010 tjs