Gogikar Sainath, v. T.Venugopal

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE U.DURGA PRASAD RAO CI VI L REVI SI ON PETI TI ON No.5398 of 2017 ORDER:

Heard Mr.K.Venugopal Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court finds no reason to order notice to the respondents, as such the Civil Revision Petition itself is disposed of at the admission sage.

2.

The instant Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by order, dated 14.09.2017, in I.A.No.919 of 2017 in O.S.No.731 of 2016 passed by X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereunder the learned Judge dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner/plaintiff seeking to advance the suit for trial. The trial Court, having found that the suit is of the year 2016, which is a latest one, dismissed the petition. Having regard to the admitted fact that O.S.No.731 of 2016, whose advancement is sought for, is of the year 2016, which is a latest one, and also having regard to the fact that the trial Court is besieged with other old matters, the order impugned cannot be found fault at this stage.

However, considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the dispute pertaining to the suit has been persisting since last seventeen years, an early judicial remedy is expedient. Therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to move a fresh petition of this nature after summer vacation for 2018, in which event, the trial Court, depending upon the work pressure, can accommodate the trial of the aforesaid suit by passing an order on merits.

UDPR,J C.R.P.No.5398 of 2017 13.10.2017 3.

With the above observations, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of.

4.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed.

______________________________ U.DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 13th October, 2017 GHN