The High Court · 2025

...Respondents/Defendants 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, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings of o.s.No.141B ot 2002 on the file of ll Additional senior Civil Judge, Metropolitan Magistrate District at Kushaiguda, pending disposal of the CRP and orders may be passed accordingly in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy Counsel for the Reipondents: Sri C. Hari Preeth The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHBTTY CIVII, REVISION PETITION No.3l35 of 2024 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed questioning the egality and validity of the order dated 1 1.09.2024 passed in I.A.No.805 of 2024 ir O.S No. 1 4 I 8 of 2022 on the fi le of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge. Kushaiguda, whereunder an application hled by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC praying the Court to granl leave for receiving certified copies of deposit.on and judgment in Cl.t-.No.36 of 2013 was dismissed.

2. Heard Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Sli C.Hari Preeth, learned counsel for responclents

3. The pet,it ioner is plaintiff and the respondents are defi:ndants in the suit belole the trial Court. For convenience, the parties are hereinafter relerred to as arrayed in the sui't.

4. The ptaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.1418 of 2022 against the defendants for declaration of title and consequently, trt order cancellation ,r1'sale deed bearing document No.10209/03, dated

27.08.2003. Aiong with the plaint, he has filed certified c<,pies of certain docurnents. Later, during the pendency of the s:it, the filed the present application stating that copies of the ^plaintiff 2 LNA, J CRP.No.3135 oJ 2021 -i documents filed along with the plaint are not legible and therefore, he prayed the trial Court to receive clear certified copies of the two documents, i.e., deposition of one Sri Gangadhar Reddy and the judgment in CC.No.36 of 2013, dated23.10.2013

5. The defendants filed counter resisting the said application on the ground that the evidence on plaintiffs side was closed and the matter was coming up for cross-examination of DW-l and at that stage, the application was filed only to fill up the lacuna in the case. Further, a specific objection was taken that deposition of a living person cannot be received and hence, prayed to dismiss the application.

6. The trial Court vide impugned order dismissed the application mainly on the ground that the plaintiff failed to show sufficient and adequate cause to receive certified copies of the aforesaid documents. It has further observed that the application was filed after lapse of ten years from the date of filing of plaint and the said delay often years is not sufficiently explained. 7 . Leamed counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff contended that the reasons assigned by the trial Court while dismissing the application are untenable and in fact, contrary to record. He further 3 LNA, J CRP.No.3 ,t35 of 2024 contended that the plaintiff has not filed any new documents, he has only.souglrt to receive clear certified copies, as the copies filed along with the plaint are not legible. He further contended that in view of establishment of new Courts, the case bundles have been transferred to rrew Courts and it has taken considerable time to Iocate and obtain certified copies of the aforesaid documents. It is specifically contended that the observation of the trial Court that there is dela1. of ten years is factually incorrect since the certified copies were ohlained on24.02.2024 and the application was filed on 01.05.2025,. therefore, the trial Court ought to have entL:rtained the application

8. Per contra, leamed counsel for the respondent/defr:ndants contended thal the trial Court has rightly dismissed the app.ication since the plaintiff hled the same belatedly only alter closure of evidence on his side and when the matter was coming for cross_ examination o f DW- | and hence, there is no illegal ity or irregularity in the impugned order and prayed the Court to rlismiss the Revision Petition. 9. Perusal of record would disclose that the plaintiff sorrght to take on record the certified copies of two documents only on the 4 I LNA, J CRP-No.3135 of 2024 ground that copies filed earlier along with the plaint are not legible and therefore, it necessitated him to file clear certified copies of the said documents. Admittedly, the plaintiff has not filed new documents and in fact, the same are more clear certified copies of the documents which were filed along with the plaint. Furthermore, if the contents of the documents are legible, it can be easily confionted, if necessary, to the witnesses and also helps the Court for better appreciation of the case and adjudication of the /rs. Insofar as admissibitity of those documents is concemed, the same can be examined by the trial Court once the documents are taken on record, including the objection taken by the defendants that deposition of a living person cannot be received. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason to dismiss the said application. In the considered opinion of this Court, the trial Court erred in dismissing the application and accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

10. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside and I.A.No.805 of 2024 in O.S.No.14l8 of 2022 on the frle of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kushaiguda, stands allowed. 5 LNA, J CRP.No.313 i ol 2024 1 1. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand ,.:losed. No costs. ,TRUE COPY// SDi-V. KAVITHA DEPUT\' REGISTRAR \ SECTION OFFICER The llAdditional Senior Civil Judge' Kushaiguda' One CC to Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to Sri C Hari Preeth, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies To, .1 2 4 kam/gh HIGH COURT DATED:2010312025 I l ORDER CRP.No.3135 of 2024 S-1 P.T E o.. $v i5 tt hlq Ns i-) l)', * ;,',/ 'i/'' r) it\ i.' ALLOWING THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION / b a--> \-