Telangana High Court
E. Anji Reddy vs Edulakanti Datta Reddy on 29 February, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
Civil Revision Petition No.546 OF 2024
ORDER:
Aggrieved by the order dated 26.07.2023 in I.A.No.1102 of
2023 in O.S.No.133 of 2003 (hereinafter will be referred as
'impugned order') passed by the learned Junior Civil Judge,
Zaheerabad, the petitioner/appellant filed the present Civil
Revision Petition to set aside the impugned order, wherein the
out of order petition filed by the petitioners/defendants under
Rule 57 of Civil Rules of Practice read with Section 151 of the
Civil Procedure Code, was dismissed.
2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will
be referred as per their array before the Junior Civil Judge,
Zaheerabad (hereinafter will be referred as 'trial Court').
3. The brief facts of the case as can be seen from the record
available before the Court are that the petitioners/defendants
filed out of order petition under Rule 57 of Civil Rules of
Practice read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code along
with a memo for disposing the suit in view of the orders of this
Court in S.A.No.356 of 2012. However, the trial Court
dismissed the petition on the ground that the defendant No.1
has no locus standi to file the petition without her impleadment
2 MGP,J
Crp_3162_2023
in the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners/defendants
filed the present Civil Revision Petition to set aside the
impugned order.
4. Heard and perused the record including the grounds of
revision.
5. As seen from the record available before this Court, the
plaintiff filed suit vide O.S.No.133 of 2003 to declare that
defendant is not the son of the plaintiff and consequential
injunction. In the said suit the defendant was set exparte,
however, the suit was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the
plaintiff filed A.S.No.29 of 2005 before the learned I Additional
District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, wherein the plaintiff
succeeded and the judgment and decree passed by the trial
Court was set aside. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant
preferred S.A.No.356 of 2012, wherein this Court allowed the
appeal and remanded the matter to the trial Court with a
direction to the defendants to file the written statement within
three months. It is pertinent to note that during the Second
Appeal, the sole appellant/defendant therein passed away and
his legal representatives were brought on record as appellant
Nos.2 and 3. The defendants have also complied with the
directions passed in the Second Appeal by filing written
3 MGP,J
Crp_3162_2023
statement within the time stipulated by this Court on
03.09.2012. Since the case was remanded and not being taken
up, the defendants have filed out of order petition along with a
memo to dispose of the suit in view of the orders of this Court in
Second Appeal, but the trial Court dismissed the out of order
petition on the ground that the defendants have no locus standi
to file the petition as they were not impleaded. Aggrieved by the
said order, the revision petitioners have approached this Court
to set aside the impugned order.
6. During the course of submissions, the learned counsel for
the revision petitioners submitted that the Civil Revision
Petition may be disposed of by giving a direction to the trial
Court to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible. As
seen from the record, the suit is of the year 2003 and more than
20 years have been lapsed until now. The High Court has
remanded back the matter to the trial Court to dispose of the
case with a period of six months by giving opportunity to both
the parties to adduce evidence. In accordance with the
directions of the High Court, the legal representatives of the sole
deceased appellant/defendant have filed written statement,
which formed part of the suit record. For the reasons best
known, the suit was not taken up before the trial Court until an
4 MGP,J
Crp_3162_2023
out of order petition is moved by the revision petitioners herein,
however, the said out of order petition was dismissed.
7. In view of the above facts and circumstances and
considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the
revision petitioners, without going into the merits of the case,
this Court is inclined to dispose of this Civil Revision Petition
with appropriate directions to the trial Court.
8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of by
directing the trial Court to dispose of the suit in O.S.No.133 of
2003 in accordance with law. However, since the suit is of the
year 2003, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the case as
expeditiously as possible preferably within two (02) months from
the date of receipt of copy of this order. The revision
petitioners/defendants shall cooperate with the trial Court in
disposing the suit as expeditiously as possible by following the
due procedure of law in proceeding ahead. There shall be no
order as to costs.
Pending Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
_______________________________
JUSTICE M.G.PRIYADARSINI
Date: 29.02.2024
AS
