The High Court · 2025

..RespondenURespondenUDefendant IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 15'l 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 in E P. No. 635 of 2013 in O.S. No. 1040 of 2012 on the file of Prl Jr Civil Judge, Warangal Pending disposal of the above Civil revision petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri. G Anil Kiran Kumar Counsel for the Respondents : - The Court made the following: ORDER HON'lll,E SRI JUSTTCI] K. L;\KSHI\'1,\N I CIVTL REVISION PETI'l'l()N No.-1951 OIi 2l)25 ORDI|I{ Heard Sri G.Anil Kiran Kurlar. learned c()u rsel tbr the petrtroner.

2. This revision is filed under Article 127 of the Constitution of lndia challenging the docket order dated 28.10.2025 in L.P.No.635 of 20 l3 in O.S.No.r040 of 2012 of the learned Principal Junior Civil J udge, Warangal.

3. l'' respondent has filed a suit vide O.S.No.i040 oi 2012 against his son i.e.2nd respondent for rnandatory injunction directing the 2"d respondent herein to restore the possession ol suit schedule propeft) to the l't respondent and to hand over all the relevant docurnents pertaining to the suit schedule property to l-rirn. -fhe was decreed on 26.02.2013. Thereafter. the i'' respondent t-rled execution petition vide E.P.No.635 of 2013. During tlre pendency of the said petition, the petitioner and her husband filed an application vide E.A.No. l4) of 2016 in E.P.No.635 of 2013 under Section l5l of CPC to recall u'arrant from the bailiff. Vide order dated 19.12.2018, leamed Executing Court dismissed the said application. l

4. According to the petitioner, the decree in O.S.No. 1040 of 2012 is null and void as the (-ourt passed the decree without pecuniary jurisdiction. She has also lllcd a conrprchensive suit in O.S.No.144 of 2022 against the rcspondent tbr dcclaration of title. The same was also disrnissed. Against the said order, thc petitioner herein has preferred an appeal vide A.S.No. 160 o12025. Vide order dated 26.03.2025, this Court granted interim iniunction. -lhereatier. she has tiled an application vide EA (SR) No.2378 ol 2025 in E.P.No.635 ot 2013 seeking io stay all turther proceedings in E.P.No.635 of 2013 pending disposal of A.S.No.l60 ol 2025. '['he' sarne was retumed by the trial Court vide order dated 09. 10.202-5 which is as tbllows:- "The petitioner herein has liled U.A.No.l4l ol 2016. claim petition, and the same was dismissed hl this Court on I I .04.201 8. Hence. the petitioner has no locus standi to file this petition. Petition is returned." sd/- 09- l0-2025"

5. Chaltenging the said docket order dated 09.10.2025, the petitioner herein flled revision vide CRP No.376l of 2025. Vide order dated 17.10.2025. tliis Court allowod the said CRP, set aside the impugned order, dated 09. 10.2025, remanded the matter back to the Executing Court with a direction to number the said EA(SR) filed by I I I I I I I I -1 the petitioner hcrt'in under Order 2l Rule 97 or 99 rcatl rvith I 5l of CPC in E.P.No. (r35 ol 201j, if the same is otherq ise ,n order and dispose of the s.rnre in accordance with lau' as erpi'ditiousll, AS possible. \'i<le in'puqned order dated 28.1 0.2025, lelm.'d [:xecuting Coufi retulncd tlrc said application as it is not in or(icr beirrg lecord petition olsanre nature. it is returned. (r. Vide rrrrlcr dated 17.01.2025. in CRP No.i76l ol 1025. this Court directcd the I:xecuting Court to nurnbcr the l:.i\ (SR)1378 ol 102-5 flled by thr petitioner and dispose it in accordrnce with lau,, il the sarle is other'.i'ise in order. Therelbre, leamed Lixecuting Court has to verily and con;ider as to whether that applicatiorr is in order.

7. l-his Courl O"rrr.O the said application and Lound that the petition is in old,-'r in all respects like signatures on thc irflidavit, courl f'ee etc.. u,hich are procedural aspects in nature. lnstcad ol considering the said aspccl i. the leamed Executing Court returned thc said application holding that it is not in order. Therelbre. the irnpugned order is contra-v to the order dated 17.01 .2025 p,rssed in CRP No.376l ol 10.15 by this Court. ln f'act, learned E''recuting Court rnisuriderstood the said order dated 17.01 .2025 in CltP No.3761 of -1

2015. Hence, this Court hcrcb;'directs the Iixccuting Court to nurnber the IIA(SR) No. 2378 of' 1025 and to dispose of the same 1n accordance with larv as expeditiousll, as possible. I herefbre, the impugned docket order dated 28.10.2025 in L.l).No.6i5 ol'2025 is erroneous and the same is liable to be set aside and accordingly set asidc.

8. In the light of the afbresaid discussion, this revision is allowed. The impugned docket order dated 28. 10.2025 in 8.P.No.635 ol 20 l3 in 0.S.No. 1040 of'1012 is sct aside. As discusscd supra, the suit is of the year 2012 and it was decreed on 26.02.2011. The aforesaid Execution Petition is of the l'ear 2013. Notice to respondcnts is rvaived by this Court by invoking its porver undcr Adicle 227 ol the Clonstitution of India. The rnatter is rc-rnanded l-rack to the leamed Execr-rting Coufi to receive, register and disposc of'thc EA(SII) No. 2378 of 2025 in E.P.No.635 ol20l-l in O.S.No. 1040 o1'2012 filed by the petitioner herein under Order 2l Rules 97 or 99 read u,ith l5l of CIPC seeking to stay all further proceedings in Il.P.No.635 of 2023, strictly in accordancc with law in compliance with the order dated t7 .10.2025 in CRP No.376l of 2025. I ) Consequentlv, miscellaneous petitions' ii any' pentling in this revision. shall stan'l closed' A96(: :id/- B. REKHA RANI ,TANT REGISTRAR \l-----7 SECTION OFFICER ,TRUE COPY// /\ To, 1 The Princil)al Junior Civil Judge, Warangal. 2. One CC to Sri. G Anil Kiran Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Cop ies DL \ N} 'f ;-^ rtNo,, Ksm tr5 .l. HIGH COURT DATED:31/10/2021; ORDER CRP.No.395'1 of 2()2 5 ALLOWING THE (]RP C