HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3885 OF 2010 Dated 27-8-2010 Between: Muthyala Mogilappa. …Petitioner. And: Dandu Rajamma and others. ...Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3885 OF 2010 ORDER: Aggrieved by the order dated 14-7-2010 passed in I.A.No.263 of 2010 in O.S.No.131 of 2003 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge Madanapalle, the petitioner preferred this Civil Revision Petition. Petitioner herein is the plaintiff and respondents herein are the defendants. The status of the parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed before the Court below. The suit in O.S.No.131 of 2003 was filed by the plaintiff before the Court below seeking recovery of the plaint schedule property and to deliver of possession of the same. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff has filed an application in I.A.No.263 of 2010 in the said suit seeking to summon the Assistant Settlement Officer, Chittoor to give evidence basing on the file in R.P.No.267/64/CTR dated 4-8- 1965. The Court below having observed that since the entire proceedings pertaining to the dispute between the parties are already filed before the Court by virtue of certified copies and as the plaintiff himself is admitting the observation given in the earlier proceedings, no purpose would be served by examining the Assistant Settlement Officer with respect to the proceedings dated 4-8-1965, dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been preferred by the plaintiff. Heard the learned counsel and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the order impugned goes to show that certified copy of the order of the Settlement Officer was marked as Ex.A.5. No purpose would be served by examining the Assistant Settlement Officer with respect to the proceedings in question since the entire proceedings pertaining to the dispute between the parties were already filed before the Court by virtue of certified copies as rightly observed by the Court below. Apart from that, as the plaintiff himself is admitting the observation given in the earlier proceedings, no purpose would also be served by summoning the Assistant Settlement Officer. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that in the absence of any dispute with regard to the genuineness or otherwise of the said certified copies, already marked as Ex.A.5, the question of summoning the Assistant Settlement Officer to give evidence does not arise. Therefore, I do not see any merits in this C.R.P. and as such, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. ________________________ JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH Dated 27-8-2010 Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3885 OF 2010 Dated 27-8-2010