The High Court · 2025

2. Smt. Yela Suvarna, Wo. Y. Balaraju, Aoe 51 vears, Occ Housewife, nYYo n.No. 2-9-12, Bus-stand Road, Jangaon Town and Mandai

3. Yela Chandrakanth, S/o. Y. Balaraju Aoe 24 vears. Occ Student, Rep. by his GPA Holder Y]Suvaina, R/o. H.No. 2-9-12, Bus-stand Road, i"ngronii*ninAMandat Sri Hanuman'Developers, Rep. by its Partner Kothuri Sridhar' S/o. K. Satyanarayana, Aged about 49 years, Occ: Businbss, PJo. H.No. 2-2-24' grik SiOe of Bus Stand, Jangaon Town and Mandal, Warangal District ...RespondenyPlaintiffs/Petitioners 4 5 Sri Laxminarasimha Swami Developers, Reo. bv its Partners, Bedide Yadaghiri, S/o. B.'Gowraiah, Aged about 45 years' Occ: Developer, R/o. H.No. 2-7 -52, Kurmawada, Jangaon Torirn and Mandal, Warangal District'

6. Kothuri Sridhar, S/o. K. Satyanatayana' Aged about 49 years, Occ Business, R/o. H.No. 2-2-24, Back Side of Bus Stand, Jangaon Town and Mandal, Warangal District

7. Kothuri Srinivasulu, S/o. K. Satyanarayana, Aged about 47 yea$, Occ Govt. Servant, R/o. H.No. 2-10-71, Ganesh Wada, Jangaon Town and [Vlandal, Warangal District

8. Kothuri Geetha, Wo. K. Srinivasulu, Aged about 45 years, Occ Housewife, R/o. H.No. 2-10-71, Ganesh Wada, Jangaon Town and Mandal, Warangal Diskict

9. Jetty Narasimha, S/o. J. llaiah, Aged about 46 years, Occ Business, R/o. H. No.2-711011, Jangaon Town and Mandal, Warangal District. 1 0. Joint Sub-Registrar-5, Jangaon, District Register, Warangal District. ...Respondents/Plaintiffs/Petitioners (Respondents No.4 to I are not necessary parties) lA NO: 2 OF 2022 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 proceedings pursuant to issuance of show cause notice dated 21-07-2022 in lA.No. 25012018 in OS.No. 5712017 on the filed of the Principal District Judge, Jangaon. lA NO: 1 of 2023 Between

1. Yela Balaraju, Slo. Late Y. Vital, 'Aged about 52 years, Occ: Govt Employee, R/o. H.No. 2-9-12, Bus-stand Road, Jangaon Town and Mandal

2. Smt. Yela Suvarna, Wo. Y. Balaraju, Age 51 years, Occ Housewife, R/o. H.No. 2-9-12, Bus-stand Road, Jangaon Town and Mandai

3. Yela Chandrakanth, S/o. Y. Balaraju, Age 24 years, Occ Student, Rep. by his GPA Holder Y. Suvarna, R/o. H.No.2-9-12, Bus-stand Road, Jangaon Town and lVlandal ... Petitioners/ Respondent 1 to 3 -------------- / And Bedide Yadaqhiri S/o- Ghouraiah, Aoed about 4-0 vears, Occ Business, nio. H.No. 2-7-52. Kurmawada locality of Jangaon I own and District, Telangana

2. Sri Hanuman DeveloPers 3- Sri Laxminarasimha Swamy Developers 4. Kothuri Sridhar 5. Kothuri Srinivasulu 6. Kothuri Geetha 7. Jetty Narasimha B Joint Sub-Registrar (Respondents 2 to B herein are not necessary parties) lA NO: 1 oF 2023 RespondenU Petitioner .. - Respondents/ Respondents 4 to 10 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 vacate the interim order granted in l'A No 2 of 2022 in C R'P'No 1722 of 2022' dated 03lOBl2O22- For the Petitioner : Sri C.M-R. Velu, Advocate For the Respondents: Sri Narendar Jalli, Advocate The Court made the following: ORDER .l THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANT CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1722 of 2022 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is hled by the petitioner - respondent - defendant aggrieved by the show cause notice dated 21.07.2022 in I.A.No.250 of 2018 in O.S.No.57 o1'20 l7 issued by the learned Principal District Judge. Jangaon calling upon the petitioner to appear and participate in the prelirninary enquiry on 04.08.2022 and therealter to initiate action under Section 10 olthe Contempt of Courts Act, I 97 I .

2. Heard Sri C.M.R.Velu, Icamed counsel lor the petitioner and Sri J.Kanakaial-r, learned Senior Counsel lcpresenting Sri Narendar Jelli, lcarncd counseI for the respondents on record

3. Learned counsel lor the petitioner contended that the order dated

19.03.2019 in I.A.No.250 ol 2018 in O.S.No.57 ol 2017 was the subject matter of C.R.P.No.846 of 2022, which was pending adjudication. There could not be a contempt when the ordel under which the contempt was passed, had been challcnged befbre this Court. The contempt al'ose for not producine the agrecrrrent of sale. After the registcrccl sale deeds were exccuted, thcr order directing to producc the agreernent oi salc rvas not valid. The sarue w,as passed basing on a recordcd audio conversation. u,hich was not admissible, as such 2 Dr-GRR,J CRP No.t 722 oI2022 prayed to set aside the show cause notice dated,2r.07.2022 in I.A.No.250 of 2018 in o.S.No.57 of 2017 issued by the rearned principar District Judge, \ Jangaon.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand contended that no stay was granted by this court in c.R.p.No.g46 of 2022, as such the Court below could proceed to take action for non-compliance of its order. Mere pendency of cRP would not debar the court berow in proceeding with the matter. The court below was justified in ordering the petitioner to show cause as to why a reference could not be made to the High court for initiation of action under Section I0 of the contempt of courts Act, rgTr and prayed to dismiss the revision.

5. Perused the record

6. 'lhe revision was filed chalrenging the show cause notice issued by the leamed Principal District Judge, Jangaon calling upon the petitioner to appear and participate in the preliminary enquiry as to why a reference could not be made to the High court for initiation of action against him under Section l0 of the contempt of courls Act, 1971. The basis for issuing the said show cause notice is for not producing original agreement of sale dated r 0.06.201 5 as directed by the cour1. Admittedty, a revision vide cRp No.g46 of 2022 was filed challenging the order in I.A.No.250 of 201g dated 19.03.2019, wherein a 3 Dr-GRR,J CRP No.l722 ol2022 direction was given to produce the original agreement of sale dated 10.06.2015 and the same was pending adjudication. The counser for the defendants I to 7 filed a memo before the concemed Courl reporting about pref.erring c.R.P.No.846 of 2022 against the order in respct of production of documents. Admittedly, no stay was granred by rhis court in c.R.p.No.g 46 of 2022. But, however, I.A'No.2 of 2022 was filed in c.R.p.No. l 722 of 2022 and, an interim order was passed on 03.0g-2022 granting interirn stay on issuing show cause notice to the petitioner herein. As seen from the order passed in I.A.No.34g of 2018 in o.S.i'io.57 of 2017 dated 19.03.20 19, the court arlowed the petition receiving the cD and pen drive subject to the petitioners - praintiffs therein producing the original device through w,ith they recorded the conversatiou between them and the defendants' counscl. [t was reported by the counser for the revision petitioner that the saicl condition was not comptied by the respondents - plaintiffs till date and the original device through which the conversation was recorded by them u'ith the derendants' counsel was not produced before the court. without producing the original device, a subsequent order was passed by the Cotrft in I.A.No.2-50 ol 20 lg in O.S.No.57 of 2017 observing that as I.A.No.34g of 20lg r,r,as ailowed directing the defendants to produce the original agreemenr of sale dated r0.06.2015. Though, it was reported that a revision was preferred against the said order, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner herein to appear and parricipate i, the pr.eriniinary I I 4 DT.GRR,J CRP No. 1722 of 2022 enquiry as to why reference could not be made to the High court for initiation of action under Secrion 10 of the contempt of courts Act, r9rr. when the respondents - plaintilfs had not produced the original device and had not complied the order of the triar couft passed in I.A.No.34g of 20lg in o.S.No.57 of 2017 dated 19.03.20 19, raking subsequent actions on it directing the defendants to produce the original agreement of sale dated 10.06.2015 and issuing show cause notice for non-production of the said document was ilregal and unjustified. As the trial court passed such an emoneous order, the same is liable to be set aside.

7. In the result, the Civil Revision petition is allowed setting aside the show cause notice dated' 2l .07.2022 in I.A.No.250 of 201g in o.S.No.57 of 2017 issued by the leamed Principat District Judge, Jangaon. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any, shall stand closed. ,TRUE COPY// SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL PUTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFIGER To, 1 Ih. Principal District Judge, Jangaon 2. One CC to Sri C.M.R. Velu, Advocate tOpUCt 3. One CC to Sri Narendar Jaili, Advocate topuil 4. Two CD Copies I t , n /-r:-{i=,.. (: ,/,;i'' i,Y ,J 't, 25 [uB 2s6 t) ?AJ r:O HIGH COURT DATED.9t6t2025 ORDER CRP.No.1722 of 2022 REVISION IS ALLOWED, NO COSTS

2.,