IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5777 OF 2009 Between: Jakkula Ramulu ..... PETITIOER AND Nookala Chandraiah ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5777 OF 2009 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed against the order, dated 30.10.2009, in I.A.No.1108 of 2009 in O.S.No.36 of 2004, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, whereunder and whereby, the application filed, under Order VIII Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short, “C.P.C.”) to receive the document i.e., original agreement of sale, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. 3. The document i.e., agreement of sale, filed by the petitioner/defendant was not received by the trial Court on the ground that no reason was assigned by the petitioner/defendant for receiving the said document. The stage of the suit is plaintiff’s evidence was completed and it is coming for defendant’s evidence and as a matter of fact, the petitioner/defendant was examined in chief. At that stage, the petition was filed by the petitioner/defendant to receive the document i.e., agreement of sale. There was no reference with regard to the contents of the document and the date of execution of document in the written statement. It is totally a new plea. There must be sufficient reason for receiving the document after filing of the written statement. It is not automatic under Order VIII Rule 1 (A) (3) C.P.C. The said provision cannot give any right for the parties, who were at fault, to receive the document at a later stage i.e., after filing of the written statement. Not even a single reason is stated by the petitioner/defendant in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, to receive the document and further more, neither the contents of the document nor the date of execution of document has been referred to in the written statement. Therefore, the trial Court exercised its discretion in dismissing the petition. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J March 19, 2010 MD