The High Court · 2025

3 e. Praneethi, Dio. Late Sri C. Rajesh, aged about 22 years, Occ. Student, R/o. H.No. 1-B-28, Yeshwant Bhavan, Temple Alwal, Secunderabad. Petitioners/Petitioners/Defendant No. 1 2 to 14 AND

1. Rani Bai, w/o Late K.Damodar Pershad, aged 68 years, Occ. House Made, R/0 H.No 1-8-7, Temple Alwal, Secunderabad.

2. C.Mithilesh Kumar, s/o Late K.Damodar Pershad, aged 42 years, Occ. Pvt. Employee, R/O H.No.1-B-7, Temple Alwal, Secundera-bad.

3. Rekha Rani, w/o Shashi Raj Kurnar, aged 47 years, Occ. House wife, R/O. H.No.3-5-65'1, Vittalvadi, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad.

4. Rupa Rani, w/o Late Shashank kaj, aged 41 years, Occ. Pvt Employee, R/O H.No. 1 8-5-969, Laldarwaja, Hyderabad. 5 Padmavathi, w/o Late M.Manohar Pershad, aged 78 years, Occ. House lrlaid R/o. H.No.'1-8-28, Yeshwant Bhavan, Temple Alwal, Secunderabad. . .. Respondents/Respondents/Plaintiffs

6. C.Raj Kumar, s/o Employee, R/o. Secunderabad. Late M.Manohar Pershad H.No.1-8-28, Yeshwant aged 62 Bha r rn, years, Occ. Rtd. Temple Alwal,

7. C-Prakash Kumar, S/o Late [t/. Manohar Pershad, agr: I about 52 years, Occ. Rtd. Employee, R/o. H No.1-8-28, Yeshwant Btt van, Temple A|wal, Secunderabad.

8. Ashalatha, w/o Dharam Karan, aged 60 years, Occ. I ouse wife, R/0 H.No. 107, Lilac, Lotus Archade, B.P.Raju Marg, Whitefields, l ondapur, Hyderabad. 9. Shobha Devt w/o late Jagath Shushan, aged 55 years Occ. Pvt. Employee, R/0 H.No 3-5-103'1 , Behind Deepak Mahal th.r ltre, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. l0,Sudhalatha, w/o Vedh Prakash, aged 52 years, Occ Pvt Employee, R/O H.No.8-15/1 , Next to Balaji Hospital, Pet Bhasheerabarl , Secunderabad. 1 1. Renuka Devi, w/o Late C.Mouleswar Pershad, aged ( 5 years, Occ. House wife, R/o H.No 1-8-28, Temple Alwal, Secunderabad.

12. C.Rajesh (Since dead as per LRS), Hyderabad.

13. C.GoMham, s/o Late C.ltiloulcshwar Pershad, aged 4r) years, Occ. Software Employee, R/o H.No.1-B-2B, Temple Alwal, Secundera: rd. 'l4.Alka, w/o Jaideep, Aged 42 years, Occ. Software Empl: ree, R/o H.No.1-8-28. Temple AIwal, Secunderabad- 'l 5. The Deputy Commissioner, Circle '18, Greater {yderabad Muncipal Corporation (GHMC), Near Lower Tank Bund. Hyderaba J. (Respondent nos. 5 to 15 are not necessary parties) Respondents/R€ s londents/Defendants lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the cir umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court mir be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in OS. No 74 of 2013 on tlr I file of Hon'ble XIX Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabac pending disposal of the above CRP Counsel for the Petitione(s):SRl S.Sridhar Counsel for the Respondents:None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1792 of2025 ORDER: Heard Sri S.Sridhar, learned counsel for the revision petltloncrs

2. [n spite of service of notices on the respondents, appeared and there is no representation on behalf of the respondents since .June, 2025 till date

3. Perused the record

4. This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggricved by the order dated 24.04.2025 passed IN 1.A.No.775 ol 2024 in O.S.No.74 of 2O 1 3 on the fiie of thc learned III Senior Civil Judge, FAC XIX Additional Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, at Secunderabad, wherein a petition filed undcr Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 19O8, to re-open the caSe to lead defendants, side evidence, has been dismissed 5 The brief facts of the case are that the respondents_plaintiffs have filed o.s.No-74 of 20I3 for perpetua-r a,d ma,datorv injunction against the petitioners-defendants herein and other defendants. The said matter was posted for defendants, side evidence on 22.03.2024- On the said date, due to thc absencc of I I I I I 2 RY,J ctp 1792 2025 the counsel on behalf of the defendants alld in the presence of PW1, the follow'ing order was passed: " Matter passeci ouer titl 2.OO pm. Defendants call' l absent No representatiott. PW1 is present. Since tlrc defenac nts faiLed to appear and cross examine PW1 despite conditio t tl order' the cross exami.nation of PWl is treated nil' For Jitr lrcr plaintiff euidence, calt on 15.04.2O24-" Insteadofclosingthedefendants,sideevidencethelearnedtrial Court erroneouslv treated the cross-examiuatiorL of PW I as 'NIL' and posted the matter on 15 04 2024 and that on 15'04'2024' whenthecotrnselforrespondents.plaintiffsbroulJttothenotrceof the Court, the following order u'as passed:- " Hearcl learned counsel for plointiff It rs . submitted bg leatned counsel J'or plaintiff thc closing the defendant euidence, this court treated cross examination of PW-l as nil' The . corrected to the D.E is closed as ordered on O ' arguments. Call on Ol-05.2024'' toticed and I instead of n-aduertentlg ;ame stands )4.2O24. For On 15.04.2024, Lhe order passed on OB'O4.20'21 was altered and then the defendants' side evidence was close'l matter to O 1 .05.2024. The reasons stated forl the petitioners-defendants are that the l"t pet t afid posted the ;n-appearance of oner was out of station and their cou.nsel has undergone eye sur[! ry. The said facts could have been treated on compassionate grot. l ds and a second 3 RY,J dp 1792 2A25 opportunlty could have been given. The suit is of the year 2013, hence there may be urgency for disposal. However, said urgency cannot be such that only one opportunity is given for adducing defendants' evidence followed by closing their evidence in case of failure when there is an error committed by the Court while passing docket order, dated 08.04.2024, the learned trial Court could have given an opportunity b1. passing a conditional order or by imposing

6. In view of the foregoing discussion. the impugned order dated

24.O4.2025 passed in 1.A.No.775 of 2024 in O.S.No.74 of 2013 is set aside ard the present Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The trial Court is directed to give an opportunrty to the defendants to put forth their evidence. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. \ To, ITRUE COPYII SD/- G. JYOTHI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER I records if any)

1. The Hon'ble XIX Additional Senior Civil Judge, at 2. One CC to SRl. S .Sridhar, Advocate tOpUCI 3. Two CD Copies Secunderabad. (with s HIGH COURT DATED l6/10t2025 ORDER CRP No.1792 of 2025 ..(\l{ S}'4 a c-) 2I .tN 2[28 t , *. CIVIL Rl'.VISION Ptrl'ITION IS n LI.OWED )h,b I