THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1065 OF 2011 Dated: 25.03.2011 Between: Veerabattula Adinarayana ..... Petitioner And Balusu Raja Rao ….. Respondent The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1065 OF 2011 ORDER: This revision petition is filed against the order dated 25.01.2011 in I.A.No.2661 of 2010 in R.C.C.No.4 of 2005, whereunder the learned Rent Controller (Principal Junior Civil Judge) Tadepalligudem had declined to reopen R.C.C.No.4 of 2005 to enable the revision petitioner to adduce further evidence. As could be seen from the material available on record, R.C.C.No.4 of 2005 was filed by the respondent herein under Section 10 of A.P.Buildings Lease Rent and Eviction Control Act, 1960 for eviction on the grounds of bonafide requirement and willful default in payment of rents. The tenant/petitioner herein contested and three witnesses were examined on his behalf. RW.3 was cross-examined on 12.07.2010 and thereafter, though various opportunities were given, he did not come forward with any further evidence. Ultimately, the matter was posted for arguments on 15.09.2010 and at that stage, he filed I.A.No.2661 of 2010 for reopening the matter to enable him to adduce further evidence. Having considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court below dismissed I.A.No.2661 of 2010. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Revision Petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is apparent from the order under revision that the Court below, on application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case recorded a finding that the petition was not bonafide and it was filed only to drag on the eviction proceedings. The discretion exercised cannot be termed perverse on any ground whatsoever. Hence, the interference by this Court is not warranted and accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 25.03.2011 Ivd