The High Court · 2025

...PETlTlONERy Respondent No. 1/ Respondent No.I /Decree Holder/ Plaintiff AND

1. Sri Jonnada Krishan, S/o. late Sri Beerappa, aged about 40 years Occ. agriculture, R/o. Pedda Kaniarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district.

2. Sri Jonnada Komaraiah, S/o. late Sri Beerappa, aged about 38 years Occ. agriculture, Rt/o- Pedda Kanjarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district.

3. Sri Jonnada Veera Mallaiah, S/o. Sri Komuraiah, aged about 70 years OcC agriculture, R/o. Pedda Kanjarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district. 4 Sri Jonnada Shekar, S/o. Sri Veera Mallaiah, aged about 40 years Occ. agriculture, Rt/o- Pedda Kanjarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district.

5. Sri Golla Nimmalaiah, S/o. Sri Anjaiah, aged about 46 years Occ. agriculture, Rl/o. Pedda Kanjarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district.

6. Sri Golla Ashok, S/o. Sri Anjaiah, aged about 46 years Occ. agriculture, Rl/o. Pedda Kanjarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district. 7. Sri Golla Venkatesham, S/o. Sri Anjaiah, aged abut 31 years Occ. agriculture, R/o- Pedda Kanjada village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district.

8. Smt. Kandi Laxmi, Wo. Late Sri Shivaraj, aged about 50 years Occ. agriculture, Rl/o. Pedda Kanjarla village Patancheru mandal, Sangareddy district. t I 7 'ifr##',er,.,YJ".,fr,:.J::!:,[1tpj:JiE:,,,."ijlxliaoedabout34 ljangareddy district. district. 'o 3"fi_!;if,3'Tl"*J:o:l RllliS;,lTf.,??"J:,:r"lf;S[ il:;j?,liSjl,il;:iltio"" '11. Ms Kandi Epsibha. D/o Afl.ffi:l:rr", ,l1t:,^S_l-slivaraj, aged about 30 years Occ. about 50 years Occ. ior ma nda l, s an ga red d y o;rl?i"||""' Rt/o. pedda Kanjarta virrase.iit:anih.;r;mandat, Sansareddy 12.Sri Golla Mallesham /Died per f_ [s. nlO ro R18), S/o. Sri Anthaiah. aoed Rl/o Pedda Kanja rla'itt'g6' ilil;cl!"; 13.Sri Golla Kistaiah. S/o Sri l\i,allaiah, aged about 60 years Occ. agriculture. Rio. pedda Kaniarta virrase eitiich;irHffii b"rlgareddy district. 14.Smt. Mamilla Manemma, Wlo Sri-Devaiah, aged about 50 years Occ. agriculture, Rl/o. Byarhote virrage Kin jlr;;#X;Uilrr"ddy district. .. TynirJ iJii.ji Respondents/ petitionersT}etiijiia^ " ilil,.|;?.ii,:1.$l;?(3,liJ"?iilll,i,,,o""o,j,,0,",i,&.,1i3T"?i3;"0",,.j1i".

16.Smt Golla Lakshmi. W/o L3t6^gri Golla Mallesh, Occ Household, Rl/o. 2 - 76/1, pedda Kanjarta Viilage. patanch;ru M;il;f!;ngareddy District. 17.Ms. Badam Mamatha D/o. Lale Sri Golla Mallesh, Occ Household, R:/o.2- 7Gt1 , pedda Kanjarta Vi,ase patanJ"ei, irirlii}l, jirsareddy Districr. "8!.?:"ft #,1111'vi:"r":i:,:l"i3l3Msif :lS".""r!',?t?,"is,Si,flf 2-76t1, (Respondents No. 16 to H;Bffittu#i3.,,8;;f .,T3y3UL?\i,=f fi ftTi,,,.ff.?["= IANo:1O F 2024 petition under Section.1.51 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of lhe petition, i;."Fi;il court may be preased to oass an order suspendino orr,er^jlred rz-ob-joia"pi]ed in E.A.No.zl+tzo2.q in E.A.No.25l2023 in E.pruo.ootzorz i" os-r.t-o qi;ioe, on the file of the tV Additional District Judoe at.sanga redJy. of above civil revision petition, in the interest-of justrce "o""ii"g-l"p"sar Counsel for the petitioner: SRt. SHYAM S AGRAWAL Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1,3 to 11 : SRI p. RANJITH KUMAR Counsel forthe Respondent No. 2 : SRI G. MAHENDER The Court made the following ORDER: : I \ THE HONOURABLE SMT. WSTICE P.SREE SUDTIA CTVTL REVISION PETITION No. 3222 of2024 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is hled aggrieved by the order, dated 12.Og.2024, passed in 8.A.No.274 of 2024 in E'A'No'2S of 2023 in E.P.No.6O ol 2072 in O.S.No.44 of 2008 by the learned lV Additional District Judge, Sangareddy.

2. The Suit uide o.S.No.44 of 2O08 for Specific Performance and the samc \\ as dt-'crced on 12.04.2010 and later E'P'No'60 of 2012 is fited b1' D.llr. During the pendency of the E'P procecdings, E.A.No.2S of 2023 was filed by the respondents to adjudicate their claim in respect of suit schedule property' E.A.No.27'l ol' 2024 u'as l'iled under Order VI Rule 14 CPC to receive the (locLtments as follows: i) C.C of O.S.No.3l5 of 2015 judgment and decree. ii) C.C ol O.S.No.316 ot 20 l5 judgment and decree. iii) C.C ol O.S. No.3 I7 of 2O i5 judgment and decree. ivJ C.e ol l.llJ Ccr tificate. r,) C.C of pah:ttri fbr the vear 1992-1993. vi) C.C of ad interim rnjunction U/o.39 R 1&2 r/w. Sec 151 o1' CPC. I l j I 2 vii) X-Copy of proc.B/9942/2OOg. viii) C.C of O.S.No.42 of 2Ot4 print Copy ix) X-Copy of appointment Proc.No.7 I 9/DLSA/ SRD / 20 I 5. x) C.C of T.O.p.No.9 of 2023. legal aid counsel

3. It is stated in the affidavit that he could not trace out the documents, as such he could not filc the same at an early point of time.

4. The reasons stated by him in non filing of the above documents and the nature of the clocuments are apparently false and cannot be accepted. He ought to hir\.e obtained the certihed copy at an earliest point of time, but statt.cl that he could not trace out the same. The trial Court rvithout considering the same allowed the application on the ground rhar rhe sald documents are received by him and later immediatclr rcccir..ecl the certihed copy, he frled the application. The said reasorring of the trail Court is patently erroneous ald hence the orrler of thc trial Court is liable to be set aside. 5 In the result, this Civil Rer.ision I)<.rition is allou.ed by setting aside the order of the trial Courr datccl 1.2.Og.2O24, passed / 3 E.A.No.274 of 2024 in D.A.No.25 of 2023 in E'P'No'6O of 2Ol2 in O.S.No.44 of 2008. No costs Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed To //TRUE COPY// sdr MoHo. lsMAlL D PUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER I

1. The lV Additional District Judge, Sangareddy. 2. One CC to SRl. SHYAM S AGRAWAL, Advocate TOPUCI 3. One CC to SRl. P. RANJITH KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies IoYPSL 1 \ \ \e I -: lt JUI'I 26 !).\ ii,r.- r-.Jf;O t HIGH COURT DATED:0710212O25 ORDER CRP.No.3222 ot 2024 ALLOWTNG THE CRP WITHOUT COSTS l/