✦ High Court of India · 04 Apr 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 04 Apr 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
04 Apr 2025
Length
1,203 words

Sri Kavoori Rajendra Prasad, S/o. Late K. Srinivasa Murthy, Aged about 66 Years. Occ Retired Employee, R/o. 5, R. C. R Residency, Road No.6, Banjara Hills Hyderabad- 500034, T.S ...PETITIONER AND

1. Sri Vikas Prahalad Deshpande @ Vikas Pralhad Deshpande, Sio. Prahalad Digambar Deshpande, Aged about 74 yeat.s,

2. Sri Siddarth Vikas Deshpande, S/o. Sri. VikasPrahalad Deshpande, @ Vikas Pralhad Deshpande Aged about 48 years, Occ Pvt. Employee

3. Smt. Seema Vikas Deshpande, C/o. Sri. Vikas Prahalad Deshpande, @ Vikas Pralhad Deshpande Aged about 44 years, Occ Private Employee Respondents 1 to 3 are permanent residents of Flat No. 18, Paigah Apartments, Sardar Patel, Road, Secunderabad-S0O003. T.S.

4. Sri. Kavuri Ravinder, S/o. Late Srinivas Murthy Aged about 52 years, Occ Self-Employee, R/o. H.No B-3-2141391F1, Srinivasa Nagar West, S. R. Nagar Post, Hyderabad-500038. T.S.

5. Sri Nagulapati Harihara Prasad, S/o. N. Venugopal Rao, Aged about 54 years, Occ Business, Rio Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad- 500028. T.S. 6. Smt. N. Vani, Wo. Veeratsailsh, D/o. N. Gopala Swamy, Aged about 50 years, Occ Housewife, Rio Plot No. 141 , H.No.7-84l4, Maruthinagar, Dammaiguda, R R. District. Pin Code 500083. T.S.

7. Sri. N. Anil Kumar. S/o N. Gopala Swamy, Aged about 53 years, Occ Business, R/o. Manjeera Nagar, Sangareddy District, T.S. Presently resrdrng at Flat No.202, Sai Resrdency, Defense Colony, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad- 500094. T.S

8. Sri. B. Balakrishna, S/o. B. Mahadevan, Aged about 54 years, Occ Business, R/o. Rajendranagar Agricultural University, Ralendranagar, Hyderabad- 500030. T.s.

9. Sri. B. Mahendra, S/o. Rangarah. Aged about 54 years, Occ Business, R/o. Khairtabad, Hyderabad-500004. T. S.

10.Sri. D. Yogeshwar Rao, S/o. D. Muthyam Rao, Aged 46 years, Occ Business, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad-500080. T S.

11. Sri. D. P. Ramesh, S/o. D. Pandu, Aged about 50 years, Occ Business, R/o. Alwal, Secunderabad- 500010. T.S.

12.Sri. D. P. Surya Prakash, S/o. D. Pandu, Aged about 55 years, Occ Business, R/o. Alwal, Secunderabad-sO0O1 0. T.S.

13.Smt. N. Nandini, Wo. Raghunath Rao, Aged about 58 years, Occ House wife, R/o. Manjeera Nagar, Sangareddy-SO2OO1. T.S.

14.Kum. N. Hyma Sree, Dio. Late N. Raghunath Rao, Aged about 36 years, Occ Housewife, R/o. Manleera Nagar, Sangareddy -502001. T.S.

15. Kum N. Usha Sree, D/o. Late N. Raghunath Rao, Aged about 29 years Occ Housewife, R/o. Manjeera Nagar, Sangareddy-502O01. T.S.

16.Sri. N. Shravan Kumar, S/o. Late N. Raghunath Rao, Aged about 31 years Occ Business, R/o. Manjeera Nagar, Sangareddy-502001 . T.S.

17.Sri. G. Sreeramulu, S/o. Late Sri. G. Ramaiah, Aged about 54 years, Occ Business, R/o. Flat. No.104, H. No. 12- 6-21207!1,2nd Floor, Sri Residency Apartments, Kukatpally, Hyderabad - 500072 T.S.

18. Sri V. Satyanarayana @ Satyam, S/o. Not Known, Aged about 46 Years, Occ Business, Rlo. 14-20-677/t'15 and 116, Vivekananda Nagar, Mothi Nagar, Borabanda, Hyderabad-50001 B. T.S

19. Deputy Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municrpal Corporation, GHMC- Circle-21, Chandanagar, Hyderabad-500050 T.S. Respondents '1 to 16 and 18 are proforma parties. ...RESPONDENTS 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 stay all further proceedings in O.S. No. 781 ol 2022 on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, At Kukatpally pending disposal of the above CRP in the interest of justice and to avoid multiplicity of the litigation Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. RAJKUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P' SAM KOSHY Civil Revision Petition No.1O39 of 2025 ORDER: The instant Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitroner under Articl e 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the Order dated 03.02.2025 in Transfer O'P'No'9O of 2024 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge' Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar (for short, 'the impugned order'l'

2. Heard Mr.G. Rajkumar' learned counsel for the petitioner' 3. The petitioncr hcrein has filed Transfer O'P'No'9O of 2O24 under Rule 63(1) ol thc Civit Procedure Code' 1908 praying the O'S'No'781 of 2022 pending on Trial Court to transfer "'i1' "'iz"' the file of I Additional Junior Cit'il Judge' Ranga Reddy District' at Kukatpally to the Court of thc Vl Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court' Ranga Reddy District' at Kukatpally and to club the said suit for joint trial along with o.S.No ,|37 of 2024 (pending in the former Court]' Initially, the petitioncr hereir-r had filed the suit' viz' 4, O.S.No.137 ol 2C;24 rrnder Scction 26 rlw Order VII Rule 1 of Civil Proceclurc Code, l9O8 scel<irrg lor dcclaration of title' mandaton' and permanen[ injurrctiorl. Whcreas' O'S'No'781 of 2022 is liled ' by respondent No. 1Z / plaintiff under Order VII Rule 1 r/w Section 26 of Civil procedure Code, 19Og against respondent No.19 / defendant seeking for a perpetual injunction 5. Vide the impugned order, the Trial Court dismissed the above Transfer O.p. on the ground that the relief sought for in the above two suits are entirely different; and that the petitioner herein is not aparty to the suit, viz., O.S.No.7gI of 2022 whichis pending on the file of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at Kukatpally.

6. Upon due consideration of the facts and also considering the findings given by the Trial Court in the impugned order, this Court does not lind any error committed by thc .I.rial Court while refusing to club the two suits together, more particularly, when the nature of relief sought for and aiso the parties to the above two suits are entirely different. 7 Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that no strong case has been made out by the learned counsel for the petitioner ca.lling for interference to the impugned order. The Civil Revision Petition being devoid of merits descrves to be and is accordingly dismissed. No costs

8. As a consequence, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ,/TRUE COPY'/ SD'. K. AMMAJI EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To TK/

1. The Principal District and Sessions Judge Ranga Reddv' At L B' Nagar 2. The I Additional '''n'o' ;i'iii'"0"g;' R;;'"s3 ReAOv Oistritt' At Kukatpallv 3. The Vl Additional D'tt'';':;;;;:n'ns'h"1tv District At Kukatpallv ;. d; tC'to sri G Raikumar' Advocate [oPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies vh- : i I I : t I i I HIGH COURT DATED:0 4t04t2O2S ORDER CRP.No.1039 of 2OZs DISMISSING THE C.R.P. FA- ZIfi,: r o R THE 5 14 r'6. 2 7 ,tuu y116 c (, c t) * P4 f6'r ..

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments