Heard Sri K. Vishnu Kumar Reddy, the party-in-person in the present civil revision petition, and Sri Venkat Narayana, the Counsel representing R-4.

2. This matter came up for admission on 1.10.2007 and it was recorded as hereunder:

"It is stated that Mr. Venkat Narayana is entering appearance and a request is made for adjournment. It is stated by the petitioner/party-in-person that the elections are scheduled to be held on 5.10.2007.

List the matter on 4.10.2007."

Thus, this matter is appearing In the list today for admission.

3. The civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, the party-in-person, being aggrieved by the order made in IA No.563 of 2007 and in O.P. No.542 of 2007 on the file of Principal District Judge, Nellore. The said application where the relief of a restraint order or stay of elections had been prayed for was dismissed.

Being aggrieved of the same, the present civil revision petition is preferred.

4. Sri Vishnu Kumar Reddy, the party-in-person, who is also a practising advocate, made the following submissions:

It is contended that there has been hike in the nomination fee for the election to the office of the 5th respondent. Association and it is also pointed out that there is refusal to convene the General Body Meeting for deciding the issue of dealing with the members, who are in default in respect of payment of monthly subscription, and the same being arbitrary, it is stated that the party-in-person approached the Court by filing the O.P. aforesaid. The representation made to the President of Nellore Bar association, District Court Compound, Nellore and the refusal made also had been placed before this Court. It is also stated that the 4th respondent himself has hiked the nomination fee for the election of the office of the Secretary from Rs.100/- to Rs.500/- at once in the years 2004 and 2005, and this is nothing, but arbitrary, in exercise of excessive power and also acted in excessive of jurisdiction. It is also stated that several of the members are economically backward and in a way instead of following the democratic principles, such members are being discouraged by such actions. While making elaborate submissions, the affidavit filed in support of the application, the respective counter-affidavits filed and the respective stands taken by the parties and also the relevant rules of Nellore Bar Association had been referred to. It is also stated before this Court that unless all these defects are rectified, to permit the respondents to proceed with the elections scheduled to be held tomorrow would amount to in a way approving the illegality in not permitting such members to participate in the election. This is against to the very democratic principle, hence appropriate orders to be passed.

5. Sri Venkat Narayan, learned Counsel representing the 4th respondent, would maintain that this is a matter concerned with the elections of Nellore Bar Association. Normally, the Courts are to be slow in interfering with the elections by either making an order of stay or making an order of restraint. The learned Counsel also would maintain that it is not as though the grievances ventilated by the party-in-person are such so as to interfere at this stage. The Counsel also would further comment that even otherwise there is no illegality or irregularity prima facie as can be seen from the counter filed by the 4th respondent before the learned District Judge, Nellore. Hence, the Counsel would submit that may be the merits and demerits of the matter may be gone into at the time of final disposal of the O.P., as such, this is not a fit matter to make an order of restraint at this stage.

6. Heard the party-in-person and also Sri Venkat Narayan, the learned Counsel representing R-4.

7. The petitioner filed IA No.563 of 2007 in O.P.542 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Nellore praying for the stay of elections by issuance of a restraint order. The learned