Telangana High Court
Kutumbaka Veeraiah vs Mateti Venkata Siva Prasad on 21 January, 2025
Author: P.Sree Sudha
Bench: P.Sree Sudha
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3102 of 2024
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the Order dated
09.06.2023 in E.A.No.9 of 2023 in E.P.No.24 of 2021 in
O.S.No.142 of 2018, passed by the learned Principal District
Judge, Khammam.
2. The Order of the trial Court, against which the present
revision petition is filed, reads as follows:
"Though the petition under Order 21 rule 52 and 58
read with Section 151 CPC, the petitioners seek
declaration that they are having right over open site of 4
acres 3 ½ guntas in S.No.30/2 of Mathkepally Revenue
Village, which is item No.1 of the E.P property.
The petitioners pleaded that they are having share
in the petition property and the suit for partition and
possession over the petition property in O.S.No.1125 of
2022 is pening between them and Judgment debtor
Nos.1 to 3, on the file of the Court of Spl.Mobile JCJ,
Khammam.
Decree holders filed counter stating that the
petitioners filed the said petition, suit and the present
petition with false allegations.
No evidence is adduced by the petitioners. The
counsel for the petitioners' is present. The counsel for the
decree holders has submitted that item No.1 of the E.P
property, which is the petition property was sold in the
open Court auction on 20.03.2023 in E.P.No.26 of 2021
on the file of the Court of IV ADJ, Khammam. On the
representation of the counsel for the decree holders the
EP is dismissed as respects the petition property and the
attachment is raised. In the circumstances, it is
unnecessary to keep this petition pending and therefore
the petition is dismissed as unnecessary."
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners herein mainly
contended that the Order of the trial Court is not a speaking
Order. He also contended that E.A was disposed of by the trial
Court without conducting enquiry and also without giving an
opportunity to the petitioners. Moreover, O.S.No.1125 of 2022 is
pending between the petitioners and J.Drs.1 to 3. Therefore,
requested the Court to set aside the Order of the trial Court.
4. No doubt, E.A.No.9 of 2023 was filed by petitioners herein
under Order 21 rule 52 and 58 R/w.151 CPC, seeking for
declaration that they are having right over the open site of 4
acres 3 ½ guntas in S.No.30/2 of Mathkepally Revenue Village,
and the trial Court observed that the said property was sold in
the open Court auction on 20.03.2023 in E.P.No.26 of 2021, as
such E.P was dismissed and attachment was raised. Therefore,
there is no point in keeping the petition pending and
accordingly dismissed the petition.
5. The argument of the petitioners' Counsel that no speaking
Order was passed cannot be accepted. In fact, it is not required
in view of the auction of the suit schedule property. Regarding
pending of O.S.No.1125 of 2022, was also brought to the notice
of the trial Court, but the trial Court observed that no evidence
was adduced by the petitioners and as the Counsel for the
decree holders has represented that item No.1 of the suit
schedule property was already sold in the open auction, it was
dismissed by the trial Court. Therefore, this Court finds no
illegality or infirmity in the Order of the trial Court.
6. In the result, the present Civil Revision Petition is
dismissed confirming the Order of the trial Court dated
09.06.2023 passed in E.A.No.9 of 2023 in E.P.No.24 of 2021 in
O.S.No.142 of 2018. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
DATE: 21.01.2025
tri
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3102 of 2024
DATE: 21.01.2025
TRI
