J. Krishna Kumari, v. Kothapally Anasurya , Anasuya,

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6583 AND 5585 OF 2012 I CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 6583 OF 2012 Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of India, against the order and decree dated 2L-tL-2012 passed in I.A.N0.581 of 20LZ in O,S,No.2434 of 2006, on the file off the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, Between:

1. J. Krishna Kumari,, Wo. J. Subba Reddy,.Aged about 55 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.I 0-5-314, Ha.t No.403, K.K. Heights, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 028.

2. J. Pradeep Reddy,, S/o. J. Subba Reddy, Aged about 31 years, Occ: Business, R/o, H.No.10-5-314, Flat No.403, K.K. Heights, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 028, ,.,..PETITION ERS/ PETITION ERS/ DEFEN DANTS 4 AN D 5 AND

1. Kothapally Anasurya @ Anasuya,, Wo. K. Pochaiah, aged about 46 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.B-2-269119/443,Indira Nagar, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - s00 034.

2. S.R. Narsing Rao,, S/o. S.R. Rajaiah, Aged about 48 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No.298, Road No.10, lubilee Hills (Gayatri Hills), Hyderabad.

3. V. Srinivas Rao,, S/o. V. Mallaiah, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No.312, Vibhavari Towers, Near Rail Vihar, Serilingampally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District.

4. M. Raghunath,, S/0. M. Nageshwar Rao, Aged about 39 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Bommuluru Village, Bapulapadu Mandal, Krishna District ...RESPONDENTS I.A. NO: l OF 2012(CRPMP. NO: 8771OF 2012) 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 all further Proceedings in OS.No.2434l2006 on the file of the VII Additional Senior Civll Judge, Ranga REddy District at L.B.Nagar, pending disposal of the main CRP IA NO: 1OF 2021 Between Kothapally Anasurya @ Anasuya,, Wo. K. Pochaiah, aged about 46 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.B-2-269179l443,Indira Nagar, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034'

.....pETrrroNER/REspoNDENT No 1 AND

.z'-%-

1. J. Krishna Kuma i,, Wo. J. Subba Reddy, Aged about 55 years, Occ: Housewife, R/o. H.No.I 0-5 314, Hat N0.403, K.K. Heights, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 028.

2. J. Pradeep Redry,, S/o. J. Subba Reddy, Aged about 31 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No. t0-5-314, Flat No.403, K.K. Heights, Masab Tank, Hyderabad - s00 028.

3. S.R. Narsing Rao, S/o. S.R. Rajaiah, Aged about 48 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H.No,298, Road |o.10, Jubilee Hllls (Gayatri Hills), Hyderabad. 4 V. Srinivas hdo,, S/o. V. Mallaiah, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Flat No.312, ViUhava iTowers, Near Rail Vihar, Serilingampally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District.

5. M. Raghunath,, : /0. M. Nageshwar Rao, Aged about 39 years, Occ: Business, R/0. Bommuluru Village, Bapulapadu Mandal, Krishna District .....RESPON DENTS / RESPONDENTS Petition under Sectior 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit flled in suppct of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to VACATE THE INTERIM ORDER )ATE 03.01.2013 in CRP. No. 5586 of 2012 by dismissing the Revision Petition Counsel for thE PEtit ONEr: SRI. T LAKSHMI NARAYANA Counsel for the Resp ,ndent No1 : S PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Resp rndent No 2 to 5 None , cryr REVISION PETITIO NO: 6586 O :12 Petition under A licle 227 of the Constitution of India; against the order and decree dated 21.11.2012 passed in IA No. 582 of 201.2 in OS No. 2434 of 2006 on the file of the VII Adr itional Senior CivilJudge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar and allow the said IA Ir:. 582 of 20t2 Between:

1. J. Krishna Kuma i, Wo. J. Subba Reddy Occ: House wife R/o. H.No. 10-5-3/4 Flat No. 403 KK t eights Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 028

2. l. Pradeep Redd', S/o. L Subba Reddy Occ: Business R/o. H.No. 10-5-3/4 Flat No. 403 KK Heigl ts Masab Tank, Hyderabad - 500 028 .....PETITIONERS/ PETITIONERS/ DEFENDANTS 4 AND 5 AND

1. Kothapally Anasu ya @ Anasuya, Wo. K. Pochaiah Occ: House wife R/o. H.No. 8-2-2681191443 ) rdira Nagar Banjara Hills Hyderabad - 50 034

2. S.R. Narsing Rao S/o. S.R. Rajaiah Occ: Business R/o. H.No. 298 Road No. 40 lunilee Hills ( Ga' atri Hills ) Hyderabad

3. V. Srinivas Rao, S /o. V.Mallaiah Occ: Business R/o. Flat No. 312 Vibhavari Towers Near Rail Vihar S rrilingampally Municipality Ranga Reddy District

4. M. Raghunath, $ r. M. Nageshwar Rao Occ: Business R/o. Bommuluru Village Bapulapadu Manr al, Krishna District .....RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTSDEFENDANTS 1 TO 3

// .-.-') IA NOr 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 extend the stay order dated 03.01.2013 made in CRP.No. 6586 of 2012 until further orders pending disposal of the main CRP I.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(CRPMP. NO: 8774 OF 2012) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in gupport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in OS No. 2434 of 2006, on the file of the VII Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.

nagar pending disposal of the main CRp and pass IA NO: 1OF 2021 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 VACATE THE INTERIM ORDER DATE 03.01,2013 in CRP. N0,6583 of 2012by dismissing the Revision Petition Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI.

THE H( iN'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA CwIL REVI SION PETITION Nos.6583 & 6Sa6 of 2Ot2 COMMON ORD IR:

In both t re CRPs, parties are common and they have arisen out of t'"r I Interlocutory Applications filed in one suit i.e. O.S.No.2434 of 2O06 on the file of VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga R:ddy district at L.B.Nagar.

2.

C.R.P.No.( 583 of 2Ol2 is filed against the order dated 2L.ll.2Ol2 in I A.No.581 of 2OI2, which was filed r_rnder Order VIII Rule 9 r/w Section 151 of CPC seeking permission to fiIe additional writte n statement.

3.

C.R.P.No.€ 586 of 2012 is filed against the order dated 21.11.2012 in I A.No.582 of 2012, which was filed under Order VIII Rule I r f ' 1 Section 15 1 of CPC seeking per.mission to amend the writt )n statement.

4.

The revisic n petitioners in both the CRPs are Defendants 4 and 5 in the me in suit. The first respondent/ plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.2431 of 2006 for cancellation of documents and consequential ir junction. According to plaintiff, she is the owner of immor able property, but impersonating her, certain documents wer, created by forgery and fabrication and her property was sL own as alienated, therefore, she filed the said suit for cancr llation of documents and for permanent injunction. The defendants 4 and 5 filed written statement on

\ 6.7.2007, admitting the ownership of plaintiff over the suit schedule property and stated that the disputed documents were validly executed. On 7.8.2000 issues were settled and evidence on behalf of plaintiff was closed on 26.120211. D.W. 1 filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination on 24.1.2012. The defendants 4 and 5 filed the present Applications, seeking permission to amend the written statement and also permission to file additional written statement. According to them, they came to know that the plaintiff is not the owner of the propert5r and the name of the original owner and the name of the plaintiff were different and plaintiff is an imfoster. The Court below while holding that all these are against the admissions made by the defendants in their written statement and there are no new grounds of defence arising after initial pleadings and this is nothing but abuse of process of Court, dismissed both the applications by impugned orders, as against which, the present CRPs have been filed.

6.

The learned counsel appearing for revision petitioners/ defendants 4 and 5 in both the revisions submits that the defendants 4 and 5 unearthed a new fact namely, plaintiff impersonated herself as owner of the suit schedule property by describing herself as Anasurya @ Anasuya, which necessitated the defendants to amend the written statement by suitable

I amendments lenying the title of the plaintiff by de,leting certain words and sul ,stitute words.

7.

Perusal rf plaint in O.S.No.2434 of 2006 5l6rwS, it is filed l I by Kothapall z Anasurya @ Anasuya for cancellation of I I agreement of ;ale and registered sale deeds and for permanent injunction. In the written statement file on 5.7.2007, defendants ad nitted that the plaintiff is owner of plots bearing No.175 and 1i 6 admeasuring 600 sq.yards in Sy.No.74 and 75 of Gopanpally village, but in the additional writtr:n statement denied the sa ne. The trial Court observed that they came up with this petiti rn at the time of examinption of defendants 4 and

5. They are n )t new grounds and against admission made by the petitioners in their written statement and failed to indicate good reason for amendment of written statement after commencemer: I of trial and dismissed LA.No.SB2 of 2Ol2 on 2t.1t.2022.

8.

Having h:ard the learned counsel for revision petitioners and perused t re material available on record, I do not find any ground to inte fere rvith the orders passed by the trial Court. The trial Cou: t rightly dismissed the applications by giving cogent and con rincing reasons.

9.

For the f rregoing reasons, both the CRPs are dismissed, confirming the orders passed by the trial Court. There shall be

no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

sD/-K.ONESIM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR lL \ //TRUE COPY I I SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L'B' Nagar

2. On6 CC to SRI T LAKSHMI NARAYANA, Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to SRI. S PRABHAKAR REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CD Copies

5. One Spare CoPy, VM TR

HIGH COURT DATED13Llt2l2O2t I

ORDER

CRP.No.6583 AND 6 ;86 of 2O,-2 1.- s | )- <"'

q\.- $"

DISMISSING THE CI\ It REVISION PETITION I 2a)>=-