THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Civil Revision Petition No.6021 of 2009 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order, dated 05.11.2009, passed by the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, in I.A.No.1319 of 2009 in O.S.No.910 of 2003, whereby and whereunder, the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff under Order XVI Rule 1(2) r/w Section 151 CPC to summon the witnesses, namely, K.Janga Reddy and Yadaiah, was dismissed. At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the two witnesses sought to be summoned by the petitioner are necessary parties for establishing the fact that at their instance only the petitioner executed the document in question conveying title of the property in favour of the first respondent. The trial Court, after taking into consideration the material available on record, came to the conclusion that the petitioner neither in the plaint nor in her evidence stated these two witnesses acted as mediators and at their insistence only, she executed the sale deed, without consideration. Further, relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Sunder v. Mohd.Ismail and others[1], wherein it is held that for granting relief under Order XVI Rule 6 CPC, the plaintiff has to satisfy that the application is a bona fide one, but not vexatious, and granting relief in such an application should not result in abuse of process of law; the trial Court dismissed the application, through the impugned order, dated 05.11.2009, observing that the petitioner has failed to establish that the witnesses sought to be summoned are necessary and relevant parties; and that the petitioner intends to introduce new facts by filing the present application. Even before this Court also, the petitioner has not produced any material to substantiate his claim that at instance of the witnesses sought to be summoned only, she executed the document in dispute. In the circumstances, this Court discerns no infirmity whatsoever warranting interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with the impugned order. The civil revision petition fails and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:03.02.2010 VGB [1] 2004(3)ALD 318