ORDER:

The sole defendant before the trial Court is the revision petitioner. The two plaintiffs in the suit are the respondents herein. This civil revision petition filed under Section 115 C.P.C. questions the correctness of order dated 25.02.2019 of learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam in I.A.No.813 of 2018 in O.S.No.514 of 2015. By the impugned order, which was made under Order XII Rule 6 C.P.C., the trial Court held its opinion that there were adequate admissions to pass a preliminary decree directing the tenant to vacate the suit schedule property. It is in challenge to that, the tenant/defendant has come up with this revision.

2. O.S.No.514 of 2015 is a suit filed with the following prayers:

property, his men and belongings and put the plaintiffs in vacant plaint schedule property;

b) Directing the defendants to pay the mense profits or damages as prayed by the plaintiffs to be ascertained by the Advocate Commissioner as appointed by the Honourable Court upon separate application filed by the plaintiff in the event of decree;

c) Costs of the suit;

d) for such other relief or reliefs as the Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.=

3.