THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO C.R.P.Nos. 5202, 5203, 5204, 5205 & 5206 OF 2010 COMMON ORDER: Heard Sri G.Madhusudhan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ch.Pushyam Kiran, learned counsel for the respondents and at their request, all the revision petitions are taken up together for disposal at the admission stage. 2. Since common question is involved in all these revisions, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order. 3. All these revision petitions are directed against the docket orders dated 02-11-2010 passed in I.A.S.R.Nos.2917, 2921, 2920, 2919 and 2918 of 2010 in O.S.Nos.189, 294, 293, 194 and 190 of 2003, respectively, on the file of the X Additional Chief Judge, (F.T.C), City Civil Court, at Hyderabad. The petitioners in all these revisions are defendants in the main suits, who filed these revisions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking to assail the docket orders, dated 02-11-2010, rejecting the applications filed purportedly under Order VII Rule 11 (a) and (d) and read with Section 151 CPC, whereunder, they sought suits be rejected. 4. Brief facts of the cases are that the respondents herein filed suits for recovery of money against the petitioners, which are being contested by the petitioners, and in fact, the petitioners have already filed written statements, trial has commenced, respondents-plaintiffs’ evidence was concluded in some of the suits and the petitioners- defendants’ evidence was concluded in some of the suits. At this stage, the present applications have been filed and the same were rejected at S.R. stage with the following common reason, as per the docket orders dated 02-11-2010, in each of the applications: “The petition is belated and ex facie lacks bona fide; hence, petition is rejected.” 5. After hearing the learned counsel on either side and perusal of the material available on record, and considering the shorn up of the details on merits, it would suffice to take note of the way of applications came to be disposed of. The very impugned orders, as extracted above, show that they are totally lacuna and did not contain any reasons nor findings, and what are the pleas, which have been raised by the petitioners in these applications for rejection of the suits. Hence, rejecting the applications without numbering the same at S.R. stage is unsustainable. It is to be taken note of that the applications of this nature filed under Order VII Rule11 CPC are involving substantial questions, ultimately, which will effect the substantive proceedings and therefore, the same cannot be disposed of in such a manner, and necessarily, which contemplates regular enquiry, consideration of the respective pleas, and observation of reasons with findings. 6. In the circumstances, without going into the merits and without expressing any opinion there on, all the Civil Revision Petitions are accordingly allowed. The docket orders dated 02-11-2010 passed in I.A.S.R.Nos.2917, 2921, 2920, 2919 and 2918 of 2010 in O.S.Nos.189, 294, 293, 194 and 190 of 2003, respectively, on the file of the X Additional Chief Judge, (F.T.C), City Civil Court, at Hyderabad, are set aside. The matters are remitted back to the Court below for fresh consideration and disposal of the same after giving notice to both the parties and hearing them in accordance with law. It is also made clear that having regard to the fact that the trial has already commenced, the Court below is directed to dispose of the applications by the end of June 2011, by conducting day to day proceedings. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 26.04.2011 Note: Issue C.C. in two weeks. B/o. KVR