HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1868 OF 2010 (CRP (SR) No. 7822 of 2010) Friday, the Ninth day of April, Two Thousand and Ten Between Sri Lalitha Onions Company (A propiretary concern) Prop. Villuri Appalanaidu Petitioner AND M/s. Nandeeshwara Trading Company (Onion, Chillies, Tamarind & Train Merchants and Commission Agents), A proprietary concern, Prop. Ch.anantha Reddy Respondent THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1868 OF 2010 (CRP (SR) No. 7822 of 2010) ORAL ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the petitioner herein, who is defendant in OS No. 1852 of 2007, assailing the order dated 26.2.2010 passed by the learned X Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad on the letter dated 22.02.2010 directing the Secretary, Agricultural Market Committee, Malakpet, Hyderabad, to give the certified copy of the document, if available, to the respondent herein, as per rules. The respondent herein filed the above suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,10,758/- with interest at 2% per month, which accumulated during the course of regular business transactions. While so, with a view to controvert the contention that the goods supplied by the plaintiff to the defendant at Anakapally from the wholesale market, Hyderabad, had not moved out at all, the plaintiff sought to summon the receipts showing the levy paid by the plaintiff in respect of the onions dispatched to the defendant. The respondent herein by letter dated 22.2.2010 was informed by the Secretary, Agricultural Marekt Committee, Malkpet, Hyderabad, that since the details of onion export is under examination of the court, the documents of true copies of export cannot be given to the respondent, but on direction there is possibility of giving them to the court. The Court below on the said letter, on 26.2.2010 had endorsed directing the Agricultural Market Committee to give certified copy of the documents if available to the party, as per rules. Aggrieved thereby the present Civil Revision Petition is filed inter alia contending that the court below erred in making the endorsement dated 26.02.2010, as if it is an order passed on administrative side, instead of exercising its jurisdiction under Civil Procedure Code and Civil Rules of Practice. As can be seen from the record, P.Ws. 1 and 2 have already been examined and as many as 36 documents are marked. The contention raised as regards the movement of onions from out of Anakepally and payment of cess to the Committee, can be decided at the conclusion of the trial. In that connection, the court below has directed the Agricultural Market Committee, Malakpet, Hyderabad, to give the certified copies of the public documents, if available to the petitioner. Having gone through the impugned order, I do not see any illegality or irregularity warranting interference by this court. Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari April 09, 2010 MAS