1 Syed Anwarullah Bakhtiyari (Died per LRs 2 to 7)'.S/o v. The lman - E- Zamana I

Sri Subramanyam Daraboina Counsel for the Respondent: Sri Talaat Sajjad The Court made the following: ORDER ...RESPONDENTS HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY CIVIL RE VTSION PETITIONNo.361 8 of2024 OkDERz ThisCivilRevisionPetitionisfiIedaggrievedbythedocket order, dated 12-11.2024, passed by the VII Junior Civil Judge' City Civil Court, Hyderabad in EP'No'982 of 2024 in OS'No'2696 of 1997, whereby the right of petitioner No'1 herein to file counter is forfeited.

2.HeardSriDaraboinaSubramanyamYadav,leamedcounsel for the petitioners, and Sri Talaat Sajjad, leamed counsel for the respondent.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent is owner of building bearing Municipal No'1-5-23(new)' admeasuring 1081 square yards, situated at Musheerabad, Hyderabad; that petitioner No.l has obtained a portion of the above property on lease in the year 1994 for running a primary school; that petitioner No'l defaulted in payment ofrents, therefore, the respondent frled a suit in OS.No.2696 of 1997 before the VII Junior Civit Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for eviction, recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits; and that the said suit was decreed by the trial Court 2 cRp.N".361B "lXtbl4 vide judgment and decree d,ated, 24.07.2001 directing petitioner No.l to vacate and handover vacant possession of the suit schedule property to respondent within a period of two months from the date ofjudgment and also to pay arrears ofrent and mesne profits t,r the date of recovery of possession. Challenging the same, petitioner No.l preferred appeal_AS.No.33 1 of 2001 before the II Additional chief Judge, city civil courl, Hyderabad and the same was dismissed. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners hled SA.No.67 of 2023 before this Court and the same is pending. Initially, this Court granted stay of execution of judgment, however, the same was vacated on 07.06.2024, on contest.

3.1. Later, the respondent filed Ep.No.9g 2 of 2024 for execution ofjudgment and decree dated24.07.2001 passed in OS.No.2696 of 1997. Petitioner No.l entered appearance and had taken time for filing counter and ultimately, the Ep was posted on 12.1 1.2024 for counter and on that day, learned counsel for petitioner No.1 fired an application for adjoumment, however, the said application was returned as a copy of the same was not served on the respondent/D.Fk and the right of petitioner No.l/J.Dr. to file counter was forfeited. Aggrieved by the same, the present Revision is filed. 3 LNA'J CRP.No-3618 of 2024

3.2. During the pendency of this Revision' petitioner No'l died and his legal heirs were brought on record as petitioner Nos'2 to 7' Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner

4. No.1 is a senior citizen and was suffering with various health issues and therefore, he sought time before the Executing Court to file counter in EP. On l2'll'2024,leamed counsel for petitioner No'l filed an apptication for adjoumment along with photographs of petitioner No.l to show that he was under medication' Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent/D'Hr avoided notice and the same was brought to the notice of the Executing Court' however, the Executing Court erroneously returned the said application and forfeited the right of petitioner No'1 to file counter' He further submitted that the petitioner has been running a school in the schedule property since J0 years and more than 750 students are pursuing their studies and if the decree passed in OS'No'2696 ol 1997 is executed in the middle of academic year' the students would be put to hardship and may also lose one academic year and considering the facts and circumstances of the case' the Executing Court ought to have given time to petitioner No'l to file counter and contest the EP and thus, prayed to allow this Revision' 4 ,O, ,".rUr".iWil,

5. the respondent on non_profit that petitioner Leamed counsel fbr respondent submitted that is a charitable and educational institution being run basis and it has established a large number of schools; No.l has taken the suit schedule property belonging to the respondent on lease and had been running a school, but, he defaulted in payment of rents, as such, a suit was filed by the respondent and the said suit was decreed on 24.07.2001, which was conlirmed in appeal-AS.No.33l of 2001 and that the Second Appeal filed against the judgment in AS.No.33I of 2001 is pending, but, petitioner No.l has been successfully avoiding to vacate the premises since 2001 even after suffering the decree. Learned counsel

5.1. further submirted rhar on l2.l 1.2024, petitioner No. I filed an adjournment application before the Executing court by filing false photographs raken at home together with fake medical certificate dated 04.11.2024 and tried to mislead the Court and hence, the Executing Court has rightly forfeited the right of petitioner No.l to file counter in the Ep. He fuither submitted that petitioners have altemate accommodation for running a school very near to the suit schedule property and therefore, taking into consideration the said aspect, the trial Court has decreed the I \ 5 LNA, J CRP.No.3618 of 2o2a suit-oS.No.2696 of 1991 way back in the year 2001 and petitioner No.1 had been enjoying the schedule property since2T years without paying any rents. He further submitted that the respondent requires the suit schedule property for utilising the same for charitable purpose. By contending thus, learned counsel submitted that there are no merits in the present Revision and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. The undisputed facts of the case are that the petitioner is a tenant of a portion of premises owned by the respondent-trust since several years. Admittedly, as the petitioner defaulted in payment of rents' the respondent filed a suit against him and the same was decreed on

24.O7.2OO1.The respondent has challenged the said decree' but was unsuccessful. He also filed Second Appeal, wherein initially interim stay was granted, which was subsequently vacated on 07 '06'2024 and the Second Appeal is pending' The petitioner' therefore' filed EP.No.982 of 2024 for execution of the decree passed in OS.No.2696 of 1997.It appears that petitioner No'1 had taken time onseveraloccasionsforfilingcounterandultimately,on l2.l1.2)24,the Executing Court forfeited his right to file counter in the EP. 'l 6 LNA, J CRP.No 36 !8 of 2024 7 It is the specific contention of the petitioners that despite filing an adjoumment application on 12.1 1.2024 enclosing photographs showing the serious health condition of petitioner No.l, the Executing Court has erroneously retumed the said application on the sole ground that notice of the said application was not given to the respondent/D.Flr. It is also the contention of petitioner that respondent/D'Fk had deliberately avoided to receive notice in adjoumment application.

8. It is also relevant to note that petitioner No. I flled this Revision Petition on 14.1 1.2024 seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 12.11.2024 and prayed to grant three months, time to file counter and advance arguments in E.p.No.9g2 of 2024.

9. one of the grounds raised by the petitioners is that more than 750 students are pursuing their studies in their school and if the decree passed in OS.No.2696 of 1997 is executed in the middle of the academic year,,the students will be put to serious hardship and su llerance and they may lose an academic year.

10. considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and also taking into account the peculiar facts and '\ circumstances of the case, in considered opinion of this Court. the 1 CRP No36la of 2024 Executing Court ought to have entertained the adjournment application considering the health condition of petitioner No'1' instead of returning the same and one more opportunity should have been given to petitioner No'l/J'Dr to file counter and thus' this Court deems it just to set aside the impugned order' In the result, this Revision is allowed and the order' dated 1 1. l2.ll.zlz4,passed by the VII Junior Civit Judge' City Civil Court' Hyderabad in EP.No.982 of 2024 in OS'No'2696 of 1997 is hereby set aside and the petitioners are granted three weeks' time from today for filing counter in the EP, failing which' their right to file counter in EP automatically stands forfeited and the Executing Court shall proceed fuither with the E'P'

12. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending' if any' shall stand closed. No costs' Sd/. P.CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA DEPUW REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, w

1. The Vll Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad' 2. One CC to Sri Subramanyam Daraboina Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Talaat Sajjad Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies l I HIGH COURT DATED: 13tOBt2O24 ORDER CRP.No.3G18 of 2024 -iHE S ( oR O(J * 2 3 rt]B 2025 'lr r.Atctt ALLOWING THE ORP &bvbr