Smt. K. Kusumalatha v. Smt. P. Snehalatha Reddy
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
l,
IN THE HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE ,:.
:]-.'
':- PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3647 OF 2023 Petition Under Anicts- 227 of the constitution of lndia against the Order dated 08-09-2023 passed in 1.A.No.432t2O22 in O.S.No.19/2017 on the file of the lll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. i:
Between:
Smt. K. Kusumalatha, W/o retired service Rl/o. C-1, Hyderabad.
Sri K. Sundar Ram aged about 7'1 years, Occ.
Lalitha Avenue, Street No.1 0 Himayatnagar,
...Petitioner/Petitioner No.1/Defendant No.1
ffi',*:
# !rqp:' ;
AND Smt. P. Snehalatha Reddy, W/o. late Sri Umakanth Reddy aged about 64 years, Occ. household P.Jo. 5-9-22110, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad. Sri P. Adithya Reddy, S/o. late Sri Umakanth Reddy aged about 43 years, Occ. housewife Rlo. 5-9-2210, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad.
3. Sri P. Vishwaksena Reddy, S/o. late Sri Umakanth Reddyaged about40 years, Occ- housewife Rlo. 5-9-22110, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad.
4. Smt. A. Akhila, W/o. Sri Chaitanya Dev D/o. late Sri Umakanth Reddy aged about 42 years, Occ. housewife Rl/o. Plot No.48, Road No.6, Film Nagar Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.
t..
i.
I 11f ... Respondent /RespondenUPlaintiffs
5. Smt. P. Nalini Reddy, S/o. Dr. P. Jagannath Reddy aged about 67 years, Occ service Permanent resident of 80, Walnut Drive Hill City, KANSAS-67642, U.S.A,
6. Smt. G. Snehalatha Reddy, W/o. Sri G.N. Ramachander Reddy aged about 65 years, Occ . household PJo. 12-5-32111 , South Lalaguda Secunderabad - 500 01 7 (respondents No.s and 6 are not necessary parlies)
...Respondents/Petitioners No.2 & 3/Oefendants No.2 & 3
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
.k'*li.ffi qf :
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 pass order staying all further proceedings in O.S.No.19/2017 on the file of the lll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above civil revision pelition, in the interest of justice. li& '
. :i ,.( Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Shyam S Agrawal Counsel for the Respondents: Sri Vadeendra Joshi The Court made the following: Order ,#;'
:Iet . ..:,;,ffi $,.ffir j,'
'ry THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOST{Y CML REVISION PETITION No.3647 of 2023 ORDER:
'Ihc challengc in the present Civil Revision Petition is the orclcr ctated 08.09.2023, passed in I.A.No.432 of 2023 in O.S.No. 19 of 2Ol7 on the file of the learned UI Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad 2.
Fleard Sri Shyam S.Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record 3.
Vicle the said impugned order, the Court below has rejected the application under VII Rule 1 I read with Section 15 1 of the C.P.C. The objection raised in the application under VII Rule 11 is that the suit is barred by limitation 4.
It is reflected from the proceedings before the Court below is that the original suit itself was filed way back in the year 2O1 6. The application under Order VII Rule 1 1 of C.P.C. l-ras been filed in the month of March, 2022 and in \ ( with the p:rssage of time the suit itself has reached the stage ( of cvide nce r
a7]
5. I'his Court does not find erny perversrty or jurisdictional error on the parl of the Corrrt bclow in rejecting the application, particularly, tal<ing not<: of the fact that the objection has been raised by thc petitione r in the written statcmcnt dated 13.12.2O17. It woulcl be lclt open for the parties to request I l-re Court for framinrl of the said issue if it hirs r-rot bcen fran-red in accordance ,,i,ith law and the Court below shall considcr the objcction so raiscd by the petitioner first and only tl'rereafter to decide the r>tirer issues if at all reqr-rired on the mcrits of the case. 6.
The prr:sent Civil Rcvision petition being devoid of merits, deset vcs to be and is accorclingly rejt:ctcd. It is further directccl that the Courl belou, shall mak<: all efforts in proceedrng with thc suit and clecide the same as expeditiously as possible. No co.sts.
As a sequel, miscellerncous petitions, if ar-r1, pending, shall stand closccl SD/- P.CH.NAGABHUSHAM ASSISTANT REGIST //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The lll Additionat Chief Judge, City Civit Court, Hyderabad !. lne !C to Sri Shyam S Agrawat, Advocate [OpUC]
3. One CC to Sri Sri Vadeendra Joshi, Advocaie [OpUC]
4. Two CD Copies NS @ ADK H:l*..
HIGH COURT DATED:21 11212023 &{$;
q-,E. S I47F 9o (
ORDER
I J c) O 1 s APR 2024 CRP.No.3647 of 2023 C.:.;pltC,H9O * -!s "
t:
REJECTING THE CRP WITHOUT COSTS . ,,+ I .,&.
,t t.. ..{