High Court · 2025

...PETITtONERS'PLAINTIFF S 1? "si3.' i"f'li AND E l:1 fi:i i'i co onv Road No 12, Ban;a 1 . Sri Bharat Bhushan Agarwal (DIED)' (died per LRs RR 5 to 8 \' 16-11-2021 e 7 2 v ear s' occ B usiness' , Eilil S:ii.?f.i,-if,?Il?i il1?:$',[?15# g:f T ' a::**ff "q:iHi;:iil"iliiff#J3l 4 Sri Manay *e, :l:fllj?f:":ril3:i-,fi3:lt3:.:BJ5""' ' ft Ai,liKgS' i-?1?rlilBll"" I fi : :ili:Affi f ar occ B usi ness' R/o P rot ' RH ii5iKl1,1?: rg.Xt, t::tL:i5'lil'Jl't'*3[ A:' 7 P o oiaM a n i s h ltoarwa|.?1"a|3l"|\'tjl Bl iL1, B:i: lLil'frtfl [i€ S Sheekha Sanghi, S/o Sri Bharat a!'rusfr.q.1 Agarwal C/o' Rahul Agarwal' R/o.Plot No 244' H Agaiwal, R/o Plot R/o Plot No-244, n"oiollo ia, i'bilee Hills' Hyderabad occ Business /o R a h u I "'?:fi *"' o cc H o usewire' .. RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS IANo: 10F 202t4 titrj;$trfllill;,i**"d:r,[rffi*ll:..]j?:f il*:#h:is*r COUNSEI fOr thE F'EtitrONEr(S): SRI VEDULA CHITRALEKHA Counsel for ther Fler; rondent No.S: SRI BHASKARA RAO Counsel for the Res;f rrrndent No.1 to 4 & G to g: The Court mader ttre .rrllowing: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT' JI'STICE P'SREE SUDHA CIVIL REVISI ON PETITION No.3962 f 20.24 o ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is hled against the Order dated 04.12-2o24in I A'No 481 of 2O15 in O S No 299 of 2O 11' passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge' at Sangareddy'

2. Petitioners herein/ plaintiffs have filed an applical\ot uide O.S.No.299 of 2011' against the 1.A.No.481 of 2015 in an Advocate respondents/ defendants' seeking to appoint commissioner to survey the rand in sy.No.2o9 of Konur Village with the help of ofhcial surveyor' The contention of the petitioners is that petitioner No' 1 / plaintiff No 1 purchased the iand admeasuring Acs B - oO gts forming part of Sy'No'2o9' situated at Kolluru Vitlage through a registered sale deed in the year 1998 in his name and also purchased a iand admeasuring Acs.3 - 37 gts of the same survey number in the name of his son and thus they are having the land total admeasuring Acs 1 1 - 37 gts in the said survey number' From then onwards' they are in possession and enjoyment of the said land' Later' petitioner No' 1 gifted Acs 3 - 0O gts out of Acs'8 - OO gts under registered gift deed to his daughter S Amulya in the year 2007' Outer ring road authority has acquired Acs 6 - 29 gts of la;rd' 2

3. a c, and c, nsf .ucted pr: .itioners shted that respondents/c efcldants have purr:fi;1566 r-he agricultural iands in Sy.No.2Or; , 2)7 and, 2O9 cmpound wall by encrfacllinS the land of petitro:-r.r nr^ r . ro an extent of 34S Sq.yrcls ancl :he land of petiticrrer. I\.1,o.2 to an e.xtent of 152 Sq.yrds. ,i.hr " r.ne encr( 'ached area was :ihr)vir r in the plan atfach^A _:'-, uttu"n"d to the plain t rl ough they objectecr tr- t same, .."tt pondents constructed ihc r:om,tound wall statinlJ th:r; they are constructing in the rr jirnd, as such petitior-r€ rs ,rave filed the suit for declaiation ol. tirle and recoverv o| Possession and also for mandator f irju,ction by removi,g trr: compound I wal'l and filed an appLcaticn t') appoin t advocate c.;r missioner the land bclonlling to them and to rlemarcate the o'o oundary of Sy.No.209 witl: thc help of official surve .r or. "'*t' 4 In the c()unter filed by the respondents in L {.Nr:.4g 1 that pet; tioners 2015 ln ().tl lVo.299 of 2Ot1, they stated claiming th 1t t,tere is a short fall of totat 497 Sq.yr ds in their lands To a:!cc -Tain the same, frrstly the lands of the peti _ioners 1.e., petit1oner No.1, petitioner No.2 and the d:rugJ- ter of petitioner N c. I shall be measured. through digrtal sur vcy to know the r,. aiit/ and requested to allow the said rLpplrcation with the abovc direction. Therefore, the trial Court apF ointed J Advocate Commissioner on o8.O4.2)lg, with the following direction: "Therefore, aou are herebg appointed- os on Aduocate Commissioner 7or d'emarca:ting ond meosuing the lands ,,;"ies uith th.e hetp of Inspector of. surues ;;;;;;;; uith the aid of allage mop and sale deeds of both the tippons' TtLe leamed Aduocate i.*.t Commissioner sholl also issue notice to both th'e porties ond obtain ttork memos if anY " 5 Work memo was filed bY Petltloner No.l on 27.07 '2019 andAdvocateCommissioner,sreportwaslrledonog.o2.2o2l.ll seems that part of the survey was conducted on 28 12'2Ot9 and the remaining ott' 22'02'2020' At the time of survey' both the parties were present and iocation map was also filed before the Court. Petitioner No'1 Iiled objections against the report of the Advocate Commissioner on 12.03.2021 and hled another application for appointment of another Advocate Commtssroner' The trial Court after considering the aiguments of both sides accepted the report of the Advocate Commissioner and also intended to consider the documents hied by him i e''Exs C1 to C7 artd evidence of surveyor and advocate commissioner at the time of disposing of the main suit' Aggrieved by the said Order' petitioners have preferred the present Civil Revision Petition' .r- 'i 4

6. ,.cir -.tecl Contcn t l h., ,u- esch.u. Counse:l for the peririon(.,_s tri...;- ttic report of the advocate cotnm " r 'rII matnlv \ vlrrrlilsslo ter is lo be advocate commisrsioller is to be -rested the court to sct asiclc the order -" r,1u iJnorher a.r.,^^-- '-., apporrlL,,, ,na tlu"."q, of thc tr 'r [ ](lurt.

7. 'Ih advocate first coro r respondr:n entire 51..1 nominate d by the ()o Sy.No.209 I demarcatr:d direct to strr advocate con the boundarr defendants ar su r.vey the ,tt e'rpunging .:orIrlissioner file.i by the t-al Court obserued that appoin::me1t (,f second for the same purpose witho rtirs; oner report is illegal. In the courter . lir.S, he statecl that it is essentiai to 'o _?,)9 of Kollur Village through an olfic b" the Deputy Tahsildar. so also the lan, ,trlment for the purpose of outer rir I a s .o be measured ancl the boundaries [r;r each portion and thus requested th( ,( \ he entire land in Sy.No.209 in rhe p rn issioner for the purpose of measurinEJ t r-'s c f the lands belonging to the pe;itio cl r ther private parties. 5av( to be ' (lc urt to g rrrad in al s Ll11.syaa 'ese tce of j s tr,:quired rers and Lnd 'xing

8. Initialll. rl I application was filed for app()rnl xcn l of advocate con.rr ril;:r;oner. The main grievance of the petitrone;.s rs that responcc. I r; :ncroached some extent of therr lar cis tnd I I 5 constructed compound wall' To ascertain the said encroachment, advocate commissioner was appointed Now' it is not practically possible to survey [he entire land in Sy'No 2O9' Both the Counsels and parties were present at the time of execution of warrant by the advocale commissioner and the commissioner submitted his report by duly taking the assistance of the surveyor and work memo was also given by the Counsel for petitioners' Vihen objections were hled' C.R.P'Nos 54O and 740 of 2O23were ltled and they q''ere allowed a direction to the trial Court to reopen by this Court with and surnmon the concerned surveYor for I.A.No.481 of 2O15' the DePutY by both sides' AccordinglY' Cross-examination inspector o[ Survey was summoned and advocate commisstoner was also examined and the report of the advocate commissione r was accepted with a specific observation that the evidence and documents will be considered at the iime of disposing of the the report of the advocate main suit. Merely because commissioner was not in favour of the petitioners' pctitroners cannot ask for eschewing of advocate commissioncr's report and they are not entitled for appointment of another advocate the suit is Pertaining to lhe Year commissioner. Admittedly, 2011- As it is a targeted case, both the parties are directed to .. 6 co opera r,t \ r tlt the trial Court for early disptsal o[ .he case Accordirlll-r,. the present Civil Rc vision petition is di ;mis,secl. 9 In I clismiss.-rl lrr confirming

04.12.2O2 i r) result, thc present Civil Revis;ron pe ition IS the Orcler of the trial Cour t clated ;r;sed in I.A.No.4g1 of 20 l5 in O.S. \u.- qe ,f 20l t, ).lrttes are directed to co_operat( rvt h tt-re trial hr: and botf Court for e Lr r cllspesal of the matter as it is There sha ll r,. ro order as to costs Mis,:c.lllt r cous petitions a tit rge terl irralter_ Pending, if an1. slrall stand closed SD //TRUE coPYtt t?t:, I ',, USE /. M(:)HD. ISMAIL JTY iIEGISTRAR CTION OFFICER . Principal Serrr, r I irit Judge, Sanoa Reddv . one cc to sR . /E DULA CHITRi[f xHi]eo*.ate [oF,UC] . One CC to SRi Bl-/TSKARA RAo, Ad;;il #;Ai . Two CD Copies SS/gh To, 1 2 J 4 M- :1: :; +'),4 2 5 ,t,lt M .r'. l, i \,, \.. (r, I_ v HIGH COUR.T DATED:01 t04tZ02S ORDER CRP.No.3g62 o,t'2024 DISMISSING 1'HIEi PETITION WITHOUT GOS] S b 1t) b