Civil Revision Petition No. 5161 of 2011 · High Court

01.11.2011 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge (F.T.C), Gudivada in allowing I.A.No.172 of 2011 in O.S.No.226 of 2008 filed by the respondent/plaintiff under Order XVI Rules 1 and 6 C.P.C to issue summon to the Mandal Surveyor, Gannavaram Mandal to bring Field Measurement Book pertaining to the plaint schedule property to clarify about the revenue survey numbers and its sub divisions of the plaint schedule property. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. As seen from the impugned order, it is clear that the trial Court has not assigned any reasons while allowing the Interlocutory Application except stating as under:

Perused the case records. Consisting the facts stated and in the interest of justice, this petition is allowed ordering to issue summons to the witness for the purpose mentioned in the petition. Issue summons to the proposed witness on payment of batta, call on 22.11.2011.

It is not expected by the trial Court to dispose of the Interlocutory Application in the manner as it did.

But minimum reasons should be assigned to know as to what was passing in the mind of the Court and the reasons for allowing the Interlocutory Application. In the absence of any such reasons, it is difficult to know the mental process of the Court whether to consider the issues relevant to the case in allowing the Interlocutory Application or not. Suffice it to say, the respondent/plaintiff filed the above Interlocutory Application stating that the Revenue Survey Number of the suit schedule property was sub divided in the Revenue Records during the course of the proceedings and therefore, she filed the above Interlocutory Application for reopening the evidence to examine the Mandal Surveyor, Gannavaram Mandal either as her witness or the witness of the court by issuing summons to him to bring Field Measurement Book pertaining to the suit schedule property to get clarification about the Revenue Survey Numbers and its sub divisions of the plaint schedule property Since the plaintiff filed the above suit permanent injunction and during the pendency of the suit, it is stated that Revenue Survey Number of the suit schedule property was sub divided in the Revenue Records, the above Interlocutory Application has been filed to prove his case and his possession over the suit schedule property with regard to survey number.

In view of the same, the discretion exercised by the Court below in allowing the Interlocutory Application does not suffer from any illegality warranting interference by this Court. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. A. GOPAL REDDY, J ______________________ Date: 09.12.2011