Sindiri Gopal Rao vs Kovvuru Gopal Rao
2023 Latest Caselaw 4636 AP

     THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

Civil Revision Petition No.1170 of 2017

ORDER:-

Aggrieved by the Order and Decree dated 17.10.2016

passed in I.A.No.574 of 2015 in I.A.No.79 of 2008 in

O.S.No.73 of 1999 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Palasa,

the petitioner has filed this Civil Revision Petition.

2. Heard Sri K.Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for the

revision petitioner and perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted

that the trial Court ought to have seen that the Advocate

Commissioner, in spite of objections raised by the revision

petitioner, failed to localize the suit scheduled property with

reference to FMB and submitted a wrong report, thereby,

adversely affecting the defence of the revision petitioner. He

further submits that the trial Court failed to appreciate the

scope of Order 26 Rule 9 of Civil Procedure Code and

erroneously dismissed the petition. He also submits that the

trial Court ought to have seen that the revision petitioner filed

suit against the Government in O.S.No.95 of 2000 where the

survey numbers of suit schedule land are the same as in

O.S.No.73 of 1999, and the Mandal Surveyor being an

employee of the Government failed to measure the suit

schedule property, and therefore, the report of the Mandal

Surveyor is biased, motivated, intentional and the impugned

order is unsustainable. He further submits that the trial Court

ought to have seen that the entrustment of warrant to the

Advocate Commissioner to execute the same with the

assistance of Divisional Surveyor, who is more technically

competent, would serve to localize the suit schedule

property, as prayed by the revision petitioner in this Petition.

4. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the

revision petitioner, this Court is inclined to direct the trial

Court to consider the objections on record filed by the

revision petitioner/plaintiff No.3 in O.S.No.73 of 1999 and to

answer the same while delivering the judgment in the suit.

Further, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the main suit

in O.S.No.73 of 1999, as expeditiously as possible,

preferably within a period of six (06) months from the date of

receipt of a copy of this Order.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if

any, shall stand closed.

_______________________ Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J Date: 03.10.2023.

BMS

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

C.R.P.No.1170 of 2017

Date: 03.10.2023

BMS