HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.6265 of 2009 Date: March 25, 2010 Between: Ch. Sarojana, W/o. Sreeshailam, Aged about 62 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o.Bheemaram, Palavelpula G.P., Hanamkonda, Warangal District, and another … Petitioners And T. Sudershanam, S/o. Veera Swamy, aged about 53 years, Occ: business, R/o.Bheemaram, Hanamkonda, Warangal District … Respondent Order: This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed calling in question order, dated 05-12-2009, passed in I.A.No.941 of 2009 in O.S.No.1703 of 2005, by the learned V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. Petitioners herein are the defendants and respondent is the plaintiff in the aforesaid suit. The suit is filed by the respondent- plaintiff, claiming damages on account of malicious prosecution, stating that the petitioners filed a complaint against him for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and after due trial, the Court of IV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Warangal acquitted him in C.C.No.371 of 2001. The respondent-plaintiff, after acquittal, alleging that the said complaint is made by the petitioners herein against him with false allegations and with a malicious intention to implicate him in a criminal case and get him arrested, filed the said suit claiming damages of Rs.90,000/- with interest. In the suit, P.W.1’s chief evidence was filed before the Court below on 18-08-2009 and from then onwards, on behalf of the petitioners, adjournments were sought to cross-examine the witness. At this stage, belatedly, the present application, in I.A.No.941 of 2009 is filed seeking to receive certain documents. The Court below, by recording a finding that the documents which are sought to be filed are not relevant, and the application is filed at a belated stage, dismissed the same by the impugned order. Hence, the present revision petition. In this revision petition, it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioners that all the documents which are sought to be filed are relevant for the purpose of disposal of the suit and the court below dismissed the said application without recording valid reasons. The suit in question is filed by the respondent-plaintiff for damages, alleging malicious prosecution against the petitioners herein. Having regard to the scope of the suit, the only thing which is to be proved is the veracity of the allegations in the complaint and whether prosecution of the respondent is malicious or not. In that view of the matter, the documents which are sought to be filed are not relevant documents and have no bearing on the issue which is to be decided in the suit. In any event, it also appears that the application is filed belatedly, without indicating any valid reason, to grant leave to file documents at this stage. In view of the reasons recorded by the Court below, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order, which warrants interference in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The civil revision petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed, however, in the circumstances with no order as to costs. ________________________________ (JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY) March 25, 2010 MRR