IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRDESH:: HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.4596 OF 2010 Between: Puvvada Varalakshmi and others …Petitioners A n d Pasupuleti Malyadri ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.4596 of 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the docket order dated 13-09-2010 in O.S.No.88 of 2010, on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, wherein the trial Court passed the following order: “As per the citation in 2003(2) LS 162 given by the advocate for the plaintiff, the document is to be marked without impounding the stamp duty. For marking documents, call on 21-09-2010”. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The respondent-plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of suit agreement of sale dated 03-03-2005. The petitioners-defendants filed written statement contesting the suit. When the matter came up for trial, the petitioners-defendants raised objection against marking the suit agreement of sale. The learned Senior Civil Judge rejected the objection and directed marking of document as an exhibit by the impugned order. 4. A perusal of the above order does not disclose any reasons for rejecting the objections raised by the petitioners-defendants, except referring to the citation in PENKEY SURYAKANTHAM V. SHAIK SILLAR[1] cited by the plaintiffs. When the petitioners-defendants have raised objections for marking the document, the learned Senior Civil Judge ought to have noted the objections and considered the same on their merits and passed a reasoned order before rejecting the said objections. At any rate, the impugned order which is very cryptic does not reflect application of judicial mind which is the basic requirement of judicial order. Such an order like the one impugned herein which does not record the basic facts nor disclose the contentions raised by the parties and which is bereft of any reasons can never be treated as a judicial order. The impugned order is, therefore, held liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge for considering the objections raised by the petitioners-defendants against marking of the said document afresh and pass a reasoned judicial order on merits. 5. In the result, the civil revision petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 15th March, 2011 Lrkm [1] 2002(3) LS 162=2003(4) ALD 61