Judgment :- The civil revision petitioner/petitioner/second defendant/judgment debtor has preferred this civil revision petition as against the order dated 28.04.2009 in R.E.A. No.113 of 2009 in R.E.P.No.94 of 2008 in O.S.No.5 of 2005 on the file of Learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Krishnagiri. 2. The trial Court while passing orders in R.E.A. No.113 of 2009 on 28.04.2009 has ordered notice of hearing and posted for filing counter by 26.06.2009. 3. It is to be noted, that the revision petitioner/petitioner/second defendant has filed R.E.A No.113 of 2009 before the Learned Principal Subordinate Judge Krishnagiri, praying for stay of further proceedings of R.E.P. No.94 of 2008 till the disposal of I.A.No.40 of 2009. 4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner urges before this Court that the trial Court in R.E.A.No.113 of 2009 while passing orders on 28.04.2009 has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested on it and mere ordering of notice without ordering an interim stay in the matter is persi-illegal and further the trial Court has not appreciated of the fact that no suit summons has been served on the petitioner since he resided at Salem and not in the address shown in the plaint and therefore, prays for allowing the civil revision petition in the interest of justice. 5. A perusal of the order passed in R.E.A.No.113 of 2009 dated 28.04.2009 by the trial Court to the effect that "the notice of hearing and counter by 26.06.2009", in the considered opinion of this Court is not a reasoned and also a final order determining the rights of the parties and, the said order cannot be construed to be a final order determining the rights of parties enabling the revision petitioner to file the present revision petition. Suffice it for this Court to point out that, when a notice has been ordered and the matter has been posted for filing of counter on 26.06.2009, the same will not provide a lever to the revision petitioner to file the present revision petition before this Court and in fact the ordering of notice and posting the matter for filing counter is not a matter to be canvassed or agitated in the civil revision petition since rights of parties have not been conclusively, completely and comprehensively determined in one way or other and resultantly the civil revision fails and the same is hereby dismissed. 6. 6. For the foregoing reasons, the civil revision petition is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. The order passed by the trial Court in R.E.A.No.113 of 2009 dated 28.04.2009 is affirmed for the reasons assigned by this Court in this revision. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the parties are directed to bear their own costs in this revision. Consequently related M.P.No.1 of 2009 is closed.