The High Court · 2025

...Respondents/Respondents/Defendant Nos.1,2,&4 to 6 '/ lA NO: 1 OF 2024 - Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, ir'"-Higt court nray be preased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to_ do not make any ca[s- to the petirioner in *,. ,i"r"lt ot justice, pending disposal of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl. Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Sri p Venkat Reddy Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 The Court made the following: ORDER t The Hon'bl e Smt. lustic e Renuka Yara Civil Rcvision Petition No.17 t0 of 2024 Order: 't'his is a (-ii,il Revisiou l)ctirion prclcrrecl aggrieved by the clocl<ct ordcr passcd bv rhc lerrrrr.rl Scnior (]ivil Judoe at Jangaon in I '\ No.275 oi 2022 in ().S.No.i- ,rf f()17, dxrcd 0g.0.1.2024. 2 I Icarrl Slr Prr.rlhi r Raj. lcarncd courrsc,l reprcsenting Sri Srinivas Rao llodduluri. lcarrrccl counscl fttr the revision pc tiri..c r/dc fc.cla. t N..-l anrl Sri I). \'cnkat rtcdclv, learned c.unscl ftrr thc rcsl-ronclcnt No.1 ,/plair'rrill.

3. 'l hc background facts of thc casc arc that respondcnt N.. 1,/plainriff trle cl u suir ftrr pa.tiri.. ercr separare possessi.n vide O.S.No.37 <tt 2011 against thc pctirioner hcrcir-r and respondent Nos.2 rr (r. 'l'hc said suit u.as posrcd krr cviclcncc oF respondcnt N<r.1 .n 10.06.2022. 'l'he suit rvls clismisscd for n.n prosecuuon on ltcc()Lrut oi lailurc to adduce thc cr iclcncc bv rcspondent No.1. Tn that c()ntc\r, I.,\ under rcr.isi.n rr';rs filecl undcr ()rcler 9. Rule 9 oF I I EB 2 \ (-P(. to rcst()re Ihc sLrit Said PCtirion \\,'as allos c.l r itlc iurptrqrrccl tiockct orclcL clatt:d 0U 04 2024 "\ggricvecl bv thc S1]IIIC rhc p rc'scrr t (-ir-il llcvision l)ctitiorr is prelcrrcd .1 ln groun.ls of rcvision, it rs plcaded that tht tlockt:t ortlcr is illcual rncl arbitrlrr xs under ()rclcr 3, Rulc 1 of (-l)( . rrn :rpplic:rtiort to l (-ourt can [.lc rnarlc onh lrr I parn' in llt r '"11 { )1- hisT lr cr rccognizcd agc:n t (\( 1 plcadcr. 'l hc deponcnr ri lr, r dclrost'cl tht, afficl;rr it ir-r I..\.No.275 ctf 2022 ts arr .\dvocarc clct l' rtrr:rchctl ro thc oificc t>i thc counscl for lespolltlcllr No.1. Saitl lti-li, tvir s rrs lllccl rvrrhout anl' aurh<,rization bv rcspottclcnr No.1. lt rs fLrrtht'r plcaclctl that rcspondenr No.l who hlccl thc strit firr partiriorr '.\ 1S not cltligcrrr tlr ecLlucrng the cviclcnce and did n()t 2lttcnd thc (.orrrt t t I I t I I t I r I i I t t t Ir irl spitr' ,rf har.ing knou'ledgc abotrt clisrl-rissal of th<' surr Irr' ( )6.(lr f (ll2 l;urthcr, rt rs plcaclccl that thcrc is rto eviclcncc' fllt.. r, r provc th:ir rcsl'ronclcnt No..l tas out of (lotrntr-r' on 10.0(t.2022 ltrttl ther tttlttt rilLl Pal)c rs \\'cre n()t fLrrrrishccl in I. \.No.275 of 2()21. \ s srtc:h, I'rt rtt tcl rhat thc irnpuppcd orcler bc set ts1(lc I I 3 -r. During rrlrurncflts, thc lcarned crtunscl for the rcvision pctiti()ncr \.ehcmentlv c()ntendcd that on[r' a pcrson who rvc lI accluaintcd u,ith thc lacts o[ thc cesc bcing a Parfi' or an agcnt or auiholized person alonc can filc thc affldarit arlrl s;ritl rask cannot bc cntrustcd to ,rn r\dv()c2ltc clerk. thet too rvithoLrt authorization. Sir-rce thc afficlai'it filcd bv an r\dvocatc clcrk is unrcnablc; thc learncd'l'nal (-or-rrt ought to h:tvc disn'rissed rhc I..\. -\lsr,, it is erguccl rhar ntr cvidcnce rvas produccd to pr()\'c thet rcsponclent N().1 was abroad rvhcn thc tnatter \r'rs 1-losted lor ltcr cviclcr-tcc. ,\s such, thcrc arc no gr<.runds lcrr rcstoration t-ri tlrc sttit artcl thcrctirrc, thc irnpugncd orclcr is liablc to be scr lsiclc. ( In rcsponsc, rhc lcarncd counscl k.'r rcspondent No.l contcndcd that thc ,\dvocatc clcrk is u,cll '.rcclr.rlin rccl with thc facts o[ thc casc as on datc , rf its dismissztl tor non Pl()secution. It is argucd that thc afhdavit conttins reas()ns ltrr non aPPeiirxtlce t>[ rcspondcnt No.1 f<rr adducir-rg cvtdencc and tltcrcfrrte , the '\ch'ocate clcrk rightll' filcd thc affidavir in rhc absence of rcspondcnt No.l u'ho is abroad I t 4 \ \ pcrtrsal of thc afficlavit filcd by rlrt .\dr, r.rtr' , It rk :,lr,,rr s th:rr rl'rc berc rnirumum lacts :irc rcr-ealctl lbout tht 'rrr (, 'nriru ti 't tri:rl orr 10,()6.1O22. ( )n rl'rc qrouncl thrt rcsponclcflr '\.. 1 lr:rs l>ct n irr ['S \ ',r,hcrc hcl chrldrcn rcside , thc 'frial court rvas P t rrsccl ro disnriss thc srrir ()n acc()rrr)t of lailurc to adducc cr.idencc. lhc rcsPonclcnr Nrr I trer,cllccl to LISA on 10. 17.2027 mcl shc rs sch:tlrrlcrl ro rcrurn to lndia on l(l.OlJ.'[)'?. I'hc clcponcr-rt (,\clr ocaLc clt r.li ) IS Ir) C()nt:lCI uirh rcspondcrlt N().1 ancl is accluaintcrl u'ith rhc t: crs ol- rhc crLsr I lrc llrscncc ol'rcsltondent No.] is ()n acc()Lrnt of hcr rt:rr .rlrrr.,acl lrr.rr rror infcntional. Srncc thc r\ch <tcarc clcrk Itas knc,\\ r.rlgc rrLroLrt thr It rJrn.g t,' .ir:rmssal ,,f thr' sutt frrr non-prosccuti, )rl. rrftlclar it is tllcri elong rvith pc tition ro restorc the suit t3. ln thc instant casc, the suit rvas disrnri:((l tirr non Pr()s('cuti()lr ()n acc()Llnt of failr-rre to addr-rcc eviclcncr ,,n tlrr. par-t , ri rt:spondcnr No. I u,l'ro liled thc suit seckirrg pardrion ;urtl separ-rrc posstssion. ll()\\cvcr. thc rcasctn fttr suclt n{)rr l-rrr \( aLttr] ,n i: ,,n Itcc( )Lror of Ircr trbscncc hom tl-rc (lountr.r' u hile re sidirrrl in t rS,\ s-irh hcr chiltlrcn. -l lrc rcsponclclrr No.1 lc[-r ro [ ,S.\ on rl) I I f ()] l rrntl r-* 5 u,as schccluled to relurn back orr 20.08.2022. In the intcrim pcriod on 10.06.2022, the suit rvas dismisscd for non-prosecution. When thc lact situation is considered, thc rcason for non Prosccution docs not appcxr to bc malaficle. As pcr the irnpugncd ordcr, the respondent No.1 as on date of passing of rl'rc irnpugned order i.c. in Aprrl, 2024 was prescnt in lndia and rvas readv to procccd rvith'thc suit. Iiurthcr, t() pr()\.c thc bor-rafidcs 6[ thc case, a c6py 6f thc p;r55p,,rl c( ]rrt.riling sramping rvas hlcd in support of thc pctitit-rn. Since the reason citcd tirr non appcarancc and non prosecution on 10-06.2022 was bonafidc, thc pctition was allorvcd

9. The onlv ground cited in thc prcse nt revisir,n f ctition t( ) challcngc the impugncd order is that the a[fidavit in support o[ thc petrrion is trled.bv an Aclvocatc clcrk. 'I'hts Court is of the considered l \ oprnion that resPondcnt No.1 was abroad and the pctiti',n t(, restt)re the suit had to be filcd wrthin one month to mcct thc recluiremcnts oF Lirnrtation period. Waiting ltrr the return c.rI respondent No.1 on

20.08.2022 rvould have lcd to cxpir'.,, o[ limltauon period. In thc circumstanccs, the Adr'ocarc clerk who had pcrsonel knou'ledge & \ ( I. I I 6 -E\.' -- abotrt rhe trtct sitLratron lcading to clismissal of the s rir is cntirlccl to frlc thc rftldar rr l(). In thc circu t'nstances, thcrc arc n() mcrlts Llt rhc ltcvision l)ctitiorr ancl rhe sarnc 1s liablc to bc clisrmssed I l. \ccorciinqlv, the (-ir.il llcvision Petitiri'r is clismissccl corr f rrrt'rtnq thc irnpuerrccl dockct otdcr passcd by rh, lcar,tcd Scniot (-rril lLrrluc rt.larrg:ron in L,'\.No.275 <tf 2022 in ().5 \'o.3r of at)lf. (lrrc(l ()S.()J.2o1 1. No costs. (-onsr:clucnth', c()nnectcd misccllaneor.r: petitiorls ar(' c los t'cl //TRUE COPYII SD/- N SRIHARI, DEPUTY REGISTRAR. 6 SECTION OFFICER I

1. SeniorCivit^JygS^e, Jangaon.(with records if any) 2. One CC to SRl. Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, Advocate iOeUCl 3. One CC to SRl. P Venkat Reddy, Advocate [OpUC] 4. Two CD Copies l I To, JA \ HIGH COURT DATED:2311O12025 I ORDER CRP.No.1710 of 2024 + a o 1HE i. oo. s 1 E tlcv ?0zl Dr: t \1 CTVIL REVISION PETITION IS DISMISSED ,TA (Q,' w t{ lar-