Perumandal Rodda Samuel v. Bachalakura Chinnaiah

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYOERABAD

WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 720 OF 2019 Petition under Article 227 ol the Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the Order dated 24-12-2018 in O.S. No. 10 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kalwakurthy. Between:

1. Perumandal Rodda Samuel, S/o. Late Devadasu, Age 70 years.

2. Perumandla Rodda Nadipaiah, S/o. Late Jangaiah, Age 48 years.

3. Perumandla Rodda Ashok, S/o. Late Jangaiah, Age 44 years.

4. Perumandla Rodda Prabhakar, S/o. Late Jangaiah, Age 40 years.

5. Perumandla Rodda Laxmamma, Died Per LRs.

6. Perumandla Rodda Yellaiah, Sio. Late Jangaiah, Age 50 years. (AIl are R/o. Agriculturists and R/o Panjugul Village of Kalwakurthy Mandal Nagarkurnool District )

7. Gaddam Vajramma, W/o. Niranjan, Age 38 Years, Occupation - Agriculture, R:/o. Konapur Village of Vangoor Mandal, Nagarkurnool District

8. Vaddeman Jangamma, W/o. Jangaiah, Age 34 Years, Occupation - Agriculture, R/o. Nadgidaa Village of Telkapally Mandal, Nagarkurnool District ,REVISION PETITIONERS AND

1. Bachalakura Chinnaiah, S/o. Jangaiah, Age 58 Years.

2. Bachalakura Ramchandri, S/o. Jangaiah, Age 56 Years.

3. Bachalakura Yellamma, Wo. Peddaiah, Age 53 Years.

4. Bachalakura Ramulamma, W/o. Ramulu, Age 40 Years, All are Agriculturist, Fl/o. Tharnikal Village of Kalwakurthy Mandal, Nagakurnool District ,..RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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

stay all further proceedings in O.S. No. 10 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kalwakurthy, pending disposal of the Civil Revision Petition For the Petitioners : SRl. K SREENIVAS, Advocate Forthe Respondents: SRI M ACHUTA REDDY, Advocate The Court made the following : ORDER I I

PSS,l.

CRP.N0.720 of 2019 I I()\()t' R.t IiI.,It SltT. .II -S't'I(t B tt. StUrD SI'DILI CIVIL REVISION PE'l'ITION No.720 of 2019 () It t) tt R:

Heard Sri K. Sreenivas, learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents 1, 3 and 4 Sri M. Achuta Reddy, as well. Perused the material placed on record.

2.

Challenging the docket order dated 24-12-2OIB passed in O.S.No.10 of 2010 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kalwakurthy, this Civil Revision Petition is filed by the plaintiffs.

3.

As can be seen from thc docket order under challenge, it was observed Ihat on his behalf plaintiff called for records as per order in LA.No.685 of 2018 and intended to mark the panchanama dated 30-7-2009 through PW-3, who is one of the panch. For which, defendants seriously disputed that when a document is called for from the author, i.e., MRO and only through him it has to be marked. The trial court after hearing both sides held that it is a public document and the objections raised by the plaintiff is proper for marking the document. O.S.No. 10 of 2010 is filed for declaration and also for injunction and to delete the names of the defendants from the ROR by restoring the names of the plaintiffs. During the pendency of the proceedings, it seems that panchanama was called for and the objection is only regarding marking of the document. A perusal of the document shows that the said panchanama was

Pss, I.

CRP.No.720 of 2019 conducted by the Assistant Revenue Inspector, Kaiwakurthy, as such, the said document has to be marked through him but not through one of the panch witness. I do not find any irregularity or illegality in the order of the trlal court, which needs no interference.

4.

In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

5. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications if any, shall stand disposed of.

SD/.T.SRINIVAS ASSISTANT R GIST //TRUE COPY'

SECTION FFICER To,

1. The Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kalwakurthy

2. One CC to SRl. K SREENIVAS, Advocate' [OPUCI

3. One CC to SRl. M ACHUTA REDDY, Advocate lOPUCl

4. Two CD Copies

5. One Spare CoPY \y SB

HIGH COURT DATE D : 1 310412022 1Y'

SrA|6 cr { .) *I 29 AUB?[12

ORDER

CRP.No.720 of 2019 DISMISSING THE CIUL REVISION PETITION WITHOUT COSTSw