Civil Revision Petition No. 1376 of 2011 · High Court · 2011

the plaintiff-respondent produce Pattedar passbook No. 47694 of Bandaram village. It is the case of the petitioners herein the plaintiff who examined himself as PW1 in the course of his deposition stated that he sold certain lands which have fallen to his share and in the deed of sale executed by him he has mentioned the pattedar passbook issued to him. Therefore, the petitioners who are the defendants in the suit sought for directions to the plaintiff to produce the same. The respondent-plaintiff filed his counter affidavit pointing out that the revenue officers have not issued any such pattedar passbook and consequently he is not in possession of any such document for him to produce. In view of this averment made on oath by the respondent-plaintiff, it is for the petitioners-defendants to lead such secondary evidence as is considered appropriate by them to establish their case that the plaintiff was issued the pattedar passbook etc. Therefore, I do not find any illegality committed by the learned Junior Civil Judge in dismissing IA NO. 287 of 2011. However, one aspect deserves to be noticed here. Learned counsel for the petitioners Sri M.Ramalingeswara Reddy, submits that the petitioners-defendants are taking appropriate steps for securing certified copies of the relevant documents from the revenue office and it takes little more time and hence if the learned Judge were to conclude hearing the case finally, the petitioners herein would be put to irreparable injury as the 2nd issue framed in the suit for trial concerns their right and title to the suit property. Be that as it may, only with a view to provide a opportunity for the defendants in the suit to produce any such document, which might ultimately help the court to arrive at a correct conclusion in the suit, I consider it appropriate to direct the learned Junior Civil Judge, at Siddipet, not to conclude the hearing in the suit till 22.4.2011 though the civil suit is an old one instituted the year 2006. With observation, the civil revision petition dismissed. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J Knk 15th April 2011 Note: Copy of the judgment be furnished to the learned counsel in two days (b/o)