Telangana High Court
Budamcharla Alias Valasani Uma Rani vs Peram Pedda Venkateswarlu on 6 February, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
CIVIL REVISION PETITON NO.2570 OF 2024
ORDER:
Heard Ms. Divya Jyoti Sahoo, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri B.Muralidhar, learned counsel for
respondent.
2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed assailing the docket
order dated 11.06.2024 in E.A.No.2 of 2022 in E.P.No.14 of 2018
in O.S.No.146 of 2015 passed by the Judge, Family Court-cum-
IV Additional District and Sessions Judge at Khammam. By
order dated 11.06.2024, the trial Court had directed the
petitioner herein to impound the document i.e., Family
Settlement Agreement dated 14.08.2012.
3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.1 herein
filed a suit in O.S.No.146 of 2015 against the respondent No.2
herein for recovery of money and the said suit was decreed by
the trial Court vide judgment dated 05.10.2018 for a sum of
Rs.21,00,000/-. Since the respondent No.2 did not comply with
the decree, respondent No.1 filed Execution Petition in
LNA,J
E.P.No.14 of 2018 before the trial Court for execution of the
decree dated 05.10.2018 and in the said E.P., respondent No.1
sought attachment of E.P. schedule property bearing house
No.4-2-151/66/A/2, Srinivasa Nagar, Khammam, for
realization of the decreetal amount and order of attachment
was passed.
4. At that stage, petitioner herein filed E.A.No.2 of 022 in
E.P.No.14 of 2018 under Order XXI Rule 58 read with Section
151 of CPC claiming share in the EP schedule property basing
on the Family Settlement Agreement, dated 14.08.2012. The
petitioner herein claimed that under the said Settlement
Agreement, he along with other family members have agreed
that all have rights over the E.P. schedule property. Taking into
consideration the claim of petitioner, the trial Court had
directed that the said Family Settlement Agreement has to be
impounded in accordance with law since the petitioner and
their family members are claiming right over the E.P. schedule
property.
LNA,J
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner had contended that
the Family Settlement Agreement dated 14.08.2012 is only an
oral understanding between the parties and, therefore, it does
not require impounding and further contended that in fact,
before filing the suit in the year 2015, the Family Settlement
Agreement was entered between the petitioner and their
family members. Therefore, the docket order dated 11.06.2024
passed by the trial Court is erroneous and same is liable to be
set aside.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 had
contended that the suit was filed in the year 2015 for recovery
of money and the same was decreed on 05.10.2018 and E.P. was
filed in the year 2018 for execution of the decree and
attachment order was also passed. At that stage, petitioner has
come up with the application filed under Order XXI Rule 58 of
CPC basing on the alleged Family Settlement Agreement dated
14.08.2012. He further contended that application is filed only
to protract and frustrate the EP proceedings and in any event,
perusal of the document would show that rights in the
LNA,J
property have been determined among the family members
and, therefore, the same requires stamp duty and as such, the
trial Court has rightly ordered for impounding the document.
7. Perusal of the record would disclose that E.A.No.2 of
2022 has been filed by the petitioner claiming right in the E.P.
schedule property only basing on the Family Settlement
Agreement dated 14.08.2012 and as per which, family members
have agreed that all of them have rights over the plot, which is
E.P.schedule property. Petitioner can claim right/share over
the subject property only when the rights are crystallized
under the Family Settlement Agreement and the Family
Settlement Agreement shall be in accordance with the
provisions of the Transfer of Property Act as well as
Registration Act and, therefore, the trial Court had rightly
ordered for impounding the document.
8. In view of above discussion, this Court does not find any
irregularity or illegality in the docket order dated 11.06.2024
LNA,J
passed by the trial Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision
Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
__________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Date: 06.02.2025
Kkm
