Telangana High Court
Jaligama Jagannatha Rao vs The Lao on 26 April, 2024
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1397 of 2024
ORDER:
1. This Civil Revision petition is filed challenging the propriety
and legality of the docket order dated 02.11.2023, in
C.F.No.1948 of 2022 in E.P.No.1 of 2021 in L.A.O.P.No.5 of 2024
on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge at Peddapalli
whereunder the petition filed by Petitioner/L.R. of decree holder
No. 1 under rules 230, 231, 233 to 235 of Civil Rules of Practice
seeking issuance of a cheque for Rs.34,37,354 /- was rejected.
2. As can be seen from the affidavit in support of the petition,
the case of the petitioner is that he is the legal representative of
the decree holder No. 1 and claimant No.110 in the O.P. The
land acquisition officer acquired their lands in Brahmanpally
Village. On reference under section 18 of Land Acquisition Act,
the court by judgment and decree dated 17.09.2014 enhanced
the compensation for the acquired lands. The judgment debtor
did not file any appeal against the judgment and decree. But the
claimants filed appeal vide L.A.A.S.No.193 of 2015 against the
Judgment and Decree in the High Court and the appeal is now
pending. After the filing of the appeal, his father(claimant
2 SN,J
CRP_1397_2024
No.110) died testate on 02.09.2021. The petitioner filed
I.A.No.1 of 2022 in the appeal to bring him on record as the
legal representative of his deceased father on the strength of the
Will Deed dated 11.02.2020 executed by his late father in his
favour. By order dated 17.09.2022 the Hon'ble High Court
allowed the petition and he is brought on record as legal
representative of his father. His father and others had filed E.P.
No.52 of 2016 for realization of the decretal amount. In that
E.P. the judgment debtor deposited Rs.3 lakhs and E.P. was
closed. Again his father and others filed E.P. No. 1 of 2021 for
realization of the balance decretal amount and the judgment
debtor deposited Rs.53,01,136/- on 26.09.2022. Thus the total
amount deposited by the judgment debtor is Rs 56,01,136/-.
The petitioner as legal representative of his deceased father is
entitled to receive an amount of Rs.34,37,354/-. Hence the
petitioner is entitled for issuance of cheque for that amount in
his favour, is the specific plea of the petitioner herein.
3. The office of the court took the objection that family
members certificate, will deed and succession certificate were
not filed along with the petition and accordingly returned the
petition.
3 SN,J
CRP_1397_2024
4. The counsel for the petitioner resubmitted the petition
without complying with the objection raised and so the matter
was called on bench.
5. The executing court after hearing the counsel for the
petitioner on the office objection by the impugned docket order
rejected the petition.
6. Feeling aggrieved by the order of rejection, the petitioner
preferred the present revision petition.
7. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner. Perused the record.
8. As can be seen from the impugned order dated 02.11.2023
in E.A.C.F.No.1948 of 2023 in E.P.No.1 of 2021 in O.P.No.5 of
2004 on the file of Senior Civil Judge at Peddapalli, the lower
court observed that the deceased father of the petitioner left
behind not only the petitioner but also his wife and other children
and that the petitioner did not implead those other legal heirs.
Apart from that, the petitioner did not file the alleged will deed
before the executing court. It is also observed by the lower court
that the petitioner did not file any document to show that the
petitioner is entitled to receive the entire share of compensation
4 SN,J
CRP_1397_2024
of his deceased father excluding the other legal heirs of his late
father.
9. The main contention of the petitioner is that as per the
order in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in L.A.A.S.No.193 of 2015 he is the
only legal representative of his deceased father since his father
had executed will deed in his favour. The copy of that order is
not filed along with the revision petition irrespective of it, when
the question relates to entitlement to receive the share of
compensation of the deceased father of the petitioner, this Court
opines that the other legal representatives are necessary parties
to the cheque petition. That is why the lower court asked for
family members certificate. Simply because the petitioner was
brought on record as legal representative of his deceased father
in the appeal on the strength of will deed, it does not follow that
he is entitled to receive the entire share amount of compensation
of his deceased father, without hearing the other legal heirs of
his deceased father to know if they do not have any objection for
issuance of the cheque in his favour. The petitioner is therefore
directed to implead the other legal heirs of his deceased father
as respondents in the cheque petition and file the copy of the will
deed. On such impleadment and filing of the will deed, the lower
5 SN,J
CRP_1397_2024
court shall register the petition and pass orders on the petition in
accordance with law.
10. The Civil Revision Petition is disposed off
accordingly.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
also stand closed.
___________________________
MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
26.04.2024
Yvkr
