Telangana High Court
Smt. E. Sharada Bai Smt. Sharada vs Smt Rangamma on 29 July, 2021
Bench: B.Vijaysen Reddy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1346 of 2019
ORDER:
This revision is filed challenging the order dated 12.04.2019
passed in Tr.O.P.No.430 of 2018 by the Principal District and Sessions
Judge, R.R. District, L.B. Nagar.
2. The aforesaid OP was filed by the petitioners seeking transfer of
O.S.No.619 of 2011 (on the file of the III Additional District Judge,
Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar) to be clubbed with O.S.No.789 of
2010 (on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy
District, at L.B. Nagar) for common trial and disposal.
3. The Court below dismissed the transfer OP by observing that the
relief sought in both the suits are different, though the schedule
property is overlapping; O.S.No.619 of 2011 is at the advance stage of
recording of defendants further evidence; the trial in O.S.No.789 of
2010 has not commenced; the disposal of O.S.No.619 of 2011 is likely
to be delayed; the result in O.S.No.619 of 2011 can be submitted
during the trial in O.S.No.789 of 2010 for consideration though the
judgment may not be binding; the Court below also observed that the
petitioners have not taken any steps for nine years despite having
knowledge of the pendency of the suits.
4. Mr. P. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.2,
has not opposed the revision. Even after service of notice on the
respondents No.3 to 7, there is no appearance.
5. The suit in O.S.No.789 of 2010 is filed cancellation of agreement
of sale cum GPA dated 18.05.2010 and to declare the registered sale
deed dated 15.09.2010. The suit schedule property is Ac.7.00 guntas
in Sy.No.397, situated at Bommaraspet Village and Gram Panchayat,
Shameerpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners herein are
the plaintiffs No.1 to 3 in O.S.No.789 of 2010. The respondents No.1
to 5 herein are the defendants in the said suit. O.S.No.619 of 2011 is
filed by the respondents No.1 to 5 herein for partition and separate
possession in respect of the same extent of Ac.7.00 guntas in
Sy.No.397, Bommaraspet Village and Gram Panchayat.
The petitioners herein are impleaded as defendants No.3 to 5 in the
said suit.
6. Both the learned counsel submitted that the suits are still
pending.
7. The endeavour of the Court should always be to ensure that
there is no multiplicity of proceedings and to avoid conflict of
decisions. The suit schedule property is one and the same in both the
suits. So also the petitioners and the respondents herein are parties to
both the suits. Thus it would be appropriate that suit in O.S. No.619
of 2011 is transferred to the Court of V Additional District Judge, and
tried along with O.S. No.789 of 2010.
8. Mr. Peri Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioners,
submitted that the respondents No.1 to 5 herein have instituted a suit
in O.S.No.525 of 2011 on the file of the XIV Additional District Judge,
Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, for cancellation of sale deeds
executed in favour of the petitioners. The suit in O.S.No.525 of 2011
was transferred to the Court of the V Additional District Judge, Ranga
Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar, to be tried either jointly or separately
along with O.S.No.789 of 2010 and to be disposed of simultaneously in
accordance with law. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of
constitution of new Additional District Court at Medchal District, all the
suits may to be transferred to the District Court at Medchal District for
common trial and disposal.
9. In case O.S.No.789 of 2010 and O.S.No.525 of 2011 have been
transferred to the Medchal Court, the present suit in O.S.No.619 of
2011 pending on the file of the III Additional District Judge, Ranga
Reddy District at L.B. Nagar shall also stand transferred to the Medchal
Court. The petitioners are given liberty to file an application for
clubbing of all the suits together for conducting joint trial. On such
application being filed, the Court below shall consider the feasibility of
conducting joint trial or simultaneous trial as the case may be,
by hearing the contesting parties.
The civil revision petition is allowed. Pending miscellaneous
petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to
costs.
__________________
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J
July 29, 2021
DSK
