The High Court · 2025

M/s. OMICS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED, Regd. Office at 1-90, Plot No 20 &21, Kavuri Hills, HI-TEC City Hyderabad - 500 081, Rep. by it Authorized Signatory and Administrative Assistant Mr.Rohan Kumar Peeruktla Son of P.V.Prabhakar Rao ...Petitioner/Petitioner/Defendant No.9 AND '1 . Smt Shamsurunnisa Begum, Wo late Mohd. Yaseen, Age: 78 years, Occ: Household, R/o Q.No.1677, Old MlG, BHEL Township, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District.

2. Mohd. Fayazuddin, S/o late Mohd. Yaseen, Age: 51 years, Occ: Business, R/o Q.No.1677, Old MlG, BHEL Township, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District.

3. Smt Vaseem Sulthana, Wo Abid Khadri, Age: 46 years, Occ: Household, R/o Q.No.'1677, Old MlG, BHEL Township, Ramachandrapuram Mandal, Sangareddy District.

4. Mohammad Riyazuddin, S/o late Mohd. Yaseen, Age: 50 years, Occ: Private Service, R/o 1381 , FERNCLIFF ClR, Pickering, ON, L1X2N9, Canada,

5. Vadiga Sulthana, Wo Abdul Rahaman, Age: 43 years, Occ: Household, Plaintiffs No.3 and 5, R/o H.No.5-1 13, lndira Nagar-l , Yanamalakuduru, Vijayawada (Rural), Auto Nagar, Krishna District, PIN - 520 007.

6. Md. Gaus, S/o late Mohd. Yaseen, Age: 55 years, Occ: Agriculture 7. Smt. Shameem Begum, Wo late Md. Ahmed D/o Mohammed Yaseen, Age: ...Respondents/Respondents/Plaintiffs 42 years, Occ: Household

8. Md. Nazeer, S/o late Mohd. Yaseen, Age: 51 years, Occ: Agriculture, 9. Md. Zailabh Uddin, S/o late Mohd. Yaseen, Age: 49 years, Occ: Agriculture, All (7 to 10) are R/o H.No.3-75, Ameenpur Village, Patancheru Mandal (Now Ameenpur Mandal), Sangareddy District

10. Smt. Vajendla Basavapurna Rao, Wo Vanjendla Venkateswara Rao, Age: 75 years, Occ: Household, R/o Plot No.64A, Road No.14, Film Nagar, jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034. l l.Phoenix Living Spaces Limited, Registered office at Plot No.1335, Road No.45, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, Rep. by Sri Gopi Krishna.

12.M/s. Neeharika lnfrastructure Private Limited, Regd. Office at Block No.7, Orchid City Centre, 3'd floor, 265 Bellasis Road, Mumbai Central (East), Mumbai - 400 008. Rep. by its Director P. Suresh Kumar S/o P. Hanumanth 13. M/s. Sreemukh Developers, A partnership firm Regd. Under the partnership Act, Office situated at Villa No.32, Luxura Greens, Opp. Kendriya Vidyalaya, New Bowenpally, Secunderabad. Rep. by its partners, i Sri Yerram Vijay Kumar S/o Shankaraiah, ii. P. Dora Swamy S/o P. Reddappa ...Respondents/Respondents/Defendant No.1 to 8 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceeding in pursuance of the Judgment and Decree dated. 05-'1 1-2024 in U.S.No.94 of 2018 on the file of the Hon'bte principal District and Sessions Judge at Sangareddy pending disposal of the CRp. Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Thakur Rishab Dev Singh Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.786 OF 2025 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the order dated 07.O2.2025 in C.F.R.No.5367 of 2024 in I.A.No(un-numbered) of 2024 in O.S.No.94 of 2O18 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge at Sangareddy

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner. Perused the rccord

3. The Suit vide O.S.No.94 of 2O 18 was hled for declaration of title and grant of perpetual injunction by respondent Nos. 1 to 5 and the same \ /as decreed C.F.R.No.5367 of 2024 was filed before the trial Court under Order IX Rule 13 of C.P.C to set aside the judgment and decree in O.S.No.94 of 2018 dated 05.1.1.2025 and the same was rcjected on the ground that the decree is not an exparte decree. Aggrieved by the said order, this civil revision petition is preferred.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner mainly contended that petitioner is defendant No.9 in the suit and he neither received any summons from the Court nor did engage any ) counsel to represent him before the Court. plaintiffs managed one Krishna Chand yamparla as a representative of the defendant No.9 Company and fraudulently filed vakalat and contested the case only to facilitate the plarntiffs to obtain the decree in their favour and the said Krishna Chand is no way connected to the petitioner/ del-endant No.9 Company. Defendant No.9 neither filed any n,ritten statement nor entered the witness box. Defendant No.9 is in possession ald enjoyment of the said property without anv interruption since purchased in the year 2017. I[ u,as notified as SEZ by the state and central Government. .r.he decree was obtained fraudulently. Therefore, requested the Court to set aside the order of the trial Court.

5. The case of the petitioner herein is no summons \\rere served upon him and he has not filed any written statement or entered into witness box. Therefore, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to set aside the order of the trial Court dated 07.02.2025 in C.F.R.No.5367 of 2024 and, to remand back the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration. The trial Court is directed to drspose of the application on merits by duly giving opportuniry to both sides. In the meanwhile, there shalt be stay of operation of \ \ \ the judgment and decree dated 05. IL.2O24 passed in O.S.No.94 of 2018 till the pronouncement of order in C.F.R.No.5367 of 2024

6. With the above direction, this Civii Revision petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to cOsts. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/- MOHD.ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER 1 The Principal District and. Sessions Court, at Sangareddy 2. one CC to Mr. Thakur Rishab o", srs; , ;;;ffii" topucl 3. Two CD Copies To, Kam/gh HIGH COURT DATED:2610312025 I 6-jl. v I c' l t\ ! .a' ( I ORDER CRP.No.786 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION @ $ 1e