Sahil Bablani v. Dr.Deepa M. Sharma
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY Civil Revision Petition No.3670 of 2023 i Civil Revision filed under Anide 227 of the Constitution of lndia, assailing the order dated 01.12.2023 passed in |.A.No.1127 ol 2023 in O.P.No.740 of 2016 and O.P.No. 1091 ol 2O17 on the file of the Judge, l Additional Family Court-cum-XlV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. l i Between:
Sahil Bablani, S/o. Kishori Lal Bablani, Aged about 40 years. Occ. L.L.B Student, R/o. 401, Kalika, Plot No.12-A, Greater Bombay Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Gulmohar Cross Road No.4, JVPD, Muinbai - 400049 represented by his GPA Holder Kishori Lal Bablani, S/o. Late Shri lshwar Dass, Aged about 70 Retired, R/o.401, Kalika, Greater Bombay CHS Ltd. Gulmohar Cross JVPD, Mumbai- 400049.
years, Occ.
Road No.4,
...Petitioner.
AND Dr.Deepa M. Sharma, Wo. Sahil Bablani, D/o. Monan Sharma, Aged about 33 years, R/o. 6, Summit Apartments, 37 HUDA Heights, Near Lotus Pond, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.
...Respondent
lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 STAY all further proceedings in O.P No.740 oi2016 and O.P No.1091 of 2017 pending before the I Additional Family Court, cum-Xlv Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad as it is posted for final argurnents, pending the main C.R.P. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri M.Kalyana Rama Krishna Counsel for the Respondent The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY Civil Revision Petition No.367O of 2023 (Lunch Motion) ORDER:
The instant Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 01.12.2023 in I.A.No.1l27 of 2023 in O.P.Nos.74O of 2016 and O.P.No.lO9l of 2Ol7 passed by the Judge, I Additional Family court-cum-Xlv Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. 2.
Heard Mr. M. Kalyana Rama Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner.
3.
Vide the impugned order, the Court below has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order VIII Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with a prayer to receive the additiona-l documents filed therein. 4.
A perusal of the impugned order would clearly reflect that the Court below has duly considered the contentions put forth by the petitioner while pressing the said I.A. and reached to a conclusion, as is evident from paragraphs Nos.7 and 8 of the impugned order, viz., "7.
Petused the entire record. It is euident from tLrc record that the O.P. is coming for further cross-examinotion
PSK,J ctp ,)67 o _)o)3 of R.W.1, i-e., petitioner herein. At this juncture, the petitioner filed the present application uith a prayer to rerreiue th.e doanments, i.e., (i) Oiginal documents uide Rep.No.C4E/ REP/ 23-2572 that Lms been sent bg the Forensic Examination of Honduiting through Mr. Phaneendar B.N. (Director) to the petitioner dated 15.09.2023 {6 pages); (ii) Copg of Engltsh TransLation from authorized translator of the copg of informotion furnished uid.e RTI-1220/S.No.190/POL-4, dated 04.O9.2O2O (2 pages); (iii) copg of Engli.sh Translation from outhorized translator of the copg of information Jurnbhed uide RTI1220/ S.No.167/ POL-4, dated 04.09.2020 (2 pages); and (iu) Copg of English Translation from authorized translotor of the copg of information issued bg Professor of Anatomg at B.J. Gouernment College, Pune that tuas receiued through R-T.l. (1 Wges).
8.
It is the contention of the respondent that those documents ore not authenticated documents and the petitiorler did not assign any reason for the delag in fling those documents ond- onlg to prolong the litigation the present application is filed, as such the petition is liable to be dismissed. As seen from the aJfidauit filed along uLith tle present application the petitioner did not cLtoose to assign ang reason for the inordinate detay o[ 8 gears in fling the aboue said documents and euen did not mention uh.ere tLose documents are all these gears and hou.t the documents uere acquired or obtained. bg the petitioner. Moreouer, the aboue said documents are not the originaL documents and onlg Engli,sh tron-slations. The documents doted O4.09.
202O and another document said to be English Translations of some other documents knoun to the petitioner himself ad-dressed to SubJnspector of Police tuithout anA date ore not hauing ang signature or seal except the seal of transldtor. The another document said to be attested copg dated 15.09.2023 attested. as "sample" by clue 4 euidence.
PSK,] qP )61a _zo2) reason for delag of 8 years and the purpose of fling the aboue said doanments and its releuancg to tlLe present O.P. ond also faits to sholD the outhenticita of tLe aboue said d.oanments. Moreouer, the petttioner is not a portA to the said documents to exhibit those doa'Lments through the petitioner as contend-ed bA the petitioner. The petition is deuoid of meits."
5.
This Court, on a perusal of the aforesa-id findings of the Court below, is of the considered opinion that the order passed by the Court below is neither unreasonable nor the Court below has committed ary error of law in passing the said impugned order.
6.
Given the factual matrix of the case and also taking note of the fact that the O.P' under consideration before the Court below is one which has been filed almost 7 to 8 years back, on this ground also this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Court below. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
7.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Civil Revision Petition, shall stand closed' SD/. T. V ASSISTANT IJAY KUMAR REGISTRAR ,,TRUE COPY"
SECTIO OFFICER To'r Th" Judge' I Additional Family Court-cum-XlV Additional Metropolitan ; 3?:*[1Jt?'"uffi i:x3"'$am a Krishna' Advocate toP uc] 5 f*o CD CoPies '":
"n* a.---<--.\.- --.-'- -
HIGH COURT l PSK, J DATED: OBt12tZO23 S e r€'
t\ TA q J 202[ o tt 1 1 r) )- * co T p
ORDER
CRP.No.36t0 of 2023 DISMISSING THE C.R.P. WTHOUT COSTS.
1,v