Ketineni Bharathi vs Kilaru Suman
2024 Latest Caselaw 3502 Tel

Telangana High Court

Ketineni Bharathi vs Kilaru Suman on 30 August, 2024

         THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

          CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1612 OF 2024

 ORDER:

Sri Md.Nawaz Hyder Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner

and Sri Md.Sultana Basha, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. With the consent finally heard.

3. This petition assails the order dated 18.03.2024 passed in

I.A.No.826 of 2023 in OP.No.1345 of 2022, whereby, application filed

by the petitioner under Order IX Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, was disallowed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said order

is bad in law, because, petitioner was not served in the original

proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other side,

drew the attention of this Court on paragraph No.15 of the impugned

order, wherein, the trial Court has recorded the finding that the

petitioner did not appear in the main case, despite receipt of notice

through E-mail.

5. By placing reliance on three judgments of Delhi High Court and

Himachal Pradesh High Court on which reliance is placed in the

impugned order, learned counsel for the respondent supported the

impugned order.

6. On a specific query from the Bench, learned counsel for the

petitioner could not show any pleading in Civil Revision Petition, which

assails the finding given in paragraph No.15 of the impugned order

about service of notice on the petitioner through E-mail. In absence

thereof, I find no reason to create doubt on such finding. The trial

Court relied on three judgments of High Courts mentioned in

paragraph Nos.18, 19 and 20 of the impugned order. Admittedly, the

petitioner filed application under Order IX Rule 7 of the C.P.C., after

matter was finally heard and reserved for judgment. No authority is

produced before me to take a different view than the view taken by

aforesaid High Courts. Since the trial Court has taken a plausible

view, no interference is warranted.

7. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No

costs. Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand

closed.

_______________________ JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL

Date: 30.08.2024 Sa/nvl