The High Court · 2025

Lallireddy (Died), S/o Narssimaha Reddy (Died) L. Agama Reddv. S/o lr^Ngqslpla Reddy, aged About S5years. Occ Asricutture, R/o p-toilrlo 108, oen Ei"tLi;J, il rrrtEil, a:);, iliffi"ttril; Gaddiannavaram, Ranga neo'av olitiicil L. Sudhakar, S/o L. Narasaimha Reddy, Aged about 5j vears. Occ Asricurture, R/o prot r.ro ror, Ddn r"iiJrd,'ri.ivJ"e_i5,-a:zq,'rr,li$?i"r.r,gii Gaddiannavaram, Ranga neauv -Oistiicil ifr :"'#':lH;'J1:r$1f1{1,,Hj1]=;i.i,X"i'fl I*lg:$:B:,T,^?i,iili;J,T Gaddiannavaram, Ranga nea'ov Oiitricil Smt. Andem Latha. W/o K Ramireddy, Dia Late NarsimlrReddy, Aged about s6 years, occ House *ir" A7o iio-t-G?2, i-i,.riffii, rowers, osmangath, Gaddiannavaram, Dilshukhhagar, ffyAeLUad Smt. Andem Vanita. Wo rua19im!.a Rao, D/olate NarsimhReddy, Aged about fl?.r.?ft;f* House wire, nio ptot r,t"'+:6-Erl ru""'ilTiiali nrs.r, Vidyanasar, ,..RESPONDENTS . I i I I I I

7. Smt. L.Rama Devi, Wo Late L. Sudhakar Reddy, Aged about 48 years, Occ: House wife, R/o Plot No. 101, DBR Enclave, H No.8-23, 8-24, Mythri Nagar, Gaddiannavaram, Hyderabad-500060, Ranga Reddy District.

8. L. Santosh Reddy, Sio Late L. Sudhakar Reddy, Aged about 48 years, Occ: House wife, R/o Plot No. 101, DBR Enclave, H No. 8-23, 8-24, Mythri Nagar, Gaddiannavaram, Hyderabad-500060, Ranga Reddy District.

9. L.Sandeep Reddy, S/o Late L. Sudhakar Reddy, Aged about 48 years, Occ: House wife, R/o Plot No '101 , DBR Enclave, H No. 8-23, 8-24, Mythri Nagar, Gaddiannavaram, Hyderabad-500060, Ranga Reddy Diskict. (Respondents Nos. 7 to I are brought on record as respondent vide Court order dtd.02.04.2024 in l.A No.4 of 2019) ...RESPONDENTS/PROPOSED RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 grant stay of further proceeding sin O.S.No. 819 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the lX Additional Senior Civil Judge, R.R District at L.B. Nagar, pending disposal of the main CRP. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. D V N ACHARYA Counsel forthe Respondent No.3, 7 to 9: M/s. S. VIJAY PRASHANTH Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRl. C H VENKATESHWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRl. CHEKURI YADAGIRI The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CTVIL REVISIoN PETITION N0.7474 of 2O18 ORDER: This Civil Revision petition is filed by the petitioners to set aside theorder dated 01.0g.2018 passed in I.A.No. 234 of 2Ol7 in O.S. No. 819 of 2OO3 by rhe IX Additionat Senior Civil Judge, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as arrayed before the tria,l Court.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff, being the elder son of the joint family, used to manage the suit schedule properties. Thereafter, disputes arose between the family members over suit schedule properties. On LO.O4.2OO2, though the plaintiff asked defendant No.l for partition of suit schedure properties, defendant No. 1 refused it at the instance of defendant Nos.2 and 3. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed suit against the defendants uide o.S. No. g19 of 2oo3 before the IV Additionat Senior Civil Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. Pendente lite, platntiff went missing from 21.12.2OL3 2 SKgJ CnqL P-EWSION PETITION No.7a74 of20U ,:, and that the revision petitioners have filed I.A. No. 234 of 2Ol7 for permitting them to implead in the suit as plaintiffs. 4 By the impugned order, the petition filed under Order i Rule 10 of the CPC read with Section 151 of the CPC to permit the petitioners for impleading them as plaintiffs in the suit, was dismissed by the trial Court. Hence, the present revls10n petition. 5 Heard Sri D.V.N.Acharya,learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.Umakalth Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the materia,l available on record. 6 Learned counsel for the revision petitioners submitted thateven after registering a case uide Crime No. 5 of 2Ol4 and also filing W.P.No.772l6 of 2014 before this Court for the plaintiff who went missing on 21.12.2013, his whereabouts are not traced out ti1l date. He further submitted that since the plaintiff is missing from 2013 i.e., for more than seven (07) years, it is deemed that the plaintiff was departed. He also submitted that the revision petitioners are wife and son of the plaintiff ald it is necessar5r to implead them as revision petitioner No.2 being a coparcener has got every right over the 3 C[,,IL REVLSION PETITION No.?474 oJ 2OiB share allotted to the missing praintiff in respect of suit schedule properties. Hence, he prayed the court to allow these civil Revision Petition. 7 On the other hald, learned counsel for the respondents opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the revision petitioners stating that the trial Court has rightly dismissed the petition as the revision petitioners are not permitted to impread in the suit a,d prayed the court to dismiss the civit Revision Petition. I I i I B. In view of the rival submissions made by both the parties, this court has perused the material evidence available on record. It is apparent that the plaintiff was missing from 2I.12.2OI3 ald since then, his whereabouts are not traced out. Pertinently, if a person is missing for seven years, there is a presumption of law that he is dead. Hence, considering the peculiar facts a,d circumstances, this court feels that ends of justice would meet if the revision petitioners are permitted to be impleaded as plaintiffs in the suit. 9 . Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition is allowed setting aside the order dated 01.08.201g passed by the IX Additionar 4 S](SJ CN\L REVISION PL?I ON No.7474 oI2O13 a\ Senior Civil Judge, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District' I'A' No' 234 of 2Ol7 in O.S. No. 819 of 2OO3 is allowed' Further' the revision petitioners are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings' There sha11 be no order as to costs' Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall aiso stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. MOHD. ISMAIL E UTY REGISTRAR s CTION OFFICER To,

2. , 4 5 t) The lX Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar One CC to SRl. D V N ACHARYA Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRl. M/s. S. VIJAY PRASHANTH Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRl. C H VENKATESHWARA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRl. CHEKURI YADAGIRI Advocate [OPUC] Two CD CoPies MKN/gh b. HIGH GOURT DATED:0210412025 q-i E!f, OA .i 1\15 N)'c () >' \?\-: * ORDER GRP.No.7474 of 2018 * aDE PA CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS ALLOWED 1 \\