THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Civil Revision Petition No.2781 of 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the common order dated 07.06.2010 passed in I.A.Nos.672 and 673 of 2010 in O.S.No.1030 of 2004, whereunder the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, dismissed the petitions filed by the petitioners herein, plaintiffs in the suit, praying to reopen the suit and to summon one Smt. Ratna Sudha, defendant No.3 in the suit, and her vendors to give evidence in the suit. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and perused the impugned order and other material available on record. As can be seen from the order under revision, the plaintiffs earlier filed application in I.A. No. 2451 of 2007 before the Court below, praying to implead the persons other than defendant No.3 herein, whom they now want to be summoned, as party defendants. The said I.A., by order dated 18.03.2008, was allowed by the Court below. Questioning the said order, the 1st and 3rd respondents herein filed revision in C.R.P. No. 2188 of 2008, and this Court, by order dated 29.07.2009, allowed the C.R.P. and set aside the order passed by the Court below. Thereafter, they filed the present application at the time when the evidence on behalf of the defendants is completed and the suit is coming up for arguments. If the present application is allowed, it virtually amounts to permitting the plaintiffs to achieve something indirectly, which they could not achieve directly. In fact, if the request of the plaintiffs is acceded to, it would virtually amount to granting the relief as prayed for by them in I.A. No. 2451 of 2007, which was refused by this Court in C.R.P. This apart, the plaintiffs, in similar suit being O.S.No.95 of 1999 also filed similar applications, seeking to reopen the said suit and summon defendant No.3 herein and her vendors to give evidence in the said suit, and the said applications were also dismissed by the Court below, which was affirmed by this Court, on the plaintiffs preferring civil revision petitions there-against. In the circumstances, no exception can be taken to the order passed by the Court below, refusing to allow the present application filed by the petitioners. For the foregoing reasons, this Court finds no reason whatsoever to interfere with the order under revision in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The civil revision petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 13th August, 2010 KSR/IBL