Telangana High Court
Shaik Abdul Aziz vs Puttapaka Srinivas on 20 November, 2025
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NOs.3203 and 3327 OF 2023
COMMON ORDER:
The present Civil Revision Petitions are filed under Article
227 of Constitution of India assailing the orders in I.A.Nos.540 and
541 of 2023 in O.S.No.44 of 2016, dated 04.10.2023 passed by the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge at Karimnagar, wherein, the
applications filed by the petitioner-defendant No.1 to receive the
documents and recall the petitioner-defendant No.1 (DW-1) to
mark the document are dismissed.
2. Petitioner herein is the petitioner-defendant No.1,
respondent No.1 herein is respondent No.1-plaintiff, and
respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein are the respondent Nos.2 to 4-
defendant Nos.2 to 4 in I.A.Nos.540 and 541 of 2023 in O.S.No.44
of 2016.
3. The grounds in both the Civil Revision Petitions are one and
the same, for the sake of convenience, grounds of C.R.P.No.3203 of
2023 are taken up.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned
trial Court erred in dismissing the applications i.e., I.A.No.540 of
2023 (to receive the documents) and I.A.No.541 of 2023 (to recall
petitioner-DW-1 for marking the documents) without assigning
reasons and without considering the written statement and prayed
to allow both the Civil Revision Petitions.
5. Notice got issued to the respondent No.1-plaintiff is served
but none appeared.
6. Power of the High Court under Article 227 is supervisory and
is exercised to ensure courts and tribunals under its supervision
act within the limits of their jurisdiction conferred by law. This
power is to be sparingly exercised in cases where errors are
apparent on the face of record, occasioning grave injustice by the
court or tribunal assuming jurisdiction which it does not have,
failing to exercise jurisdiction which it does have, or exercising its
jurisdiction in a perverse manner (See: K.Valarmathi and Others
Vs. Kumaresan - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 985).
7. Respondent No.1-plaintiff filed a suit for Perpetual Injunction
against the petitioner-defendant Nos.1 and defendant Nos. 2 to 4.
(respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein), restraining them from interfering
with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule
property i.e., land to an extent of 1210 Sq.Yards in Sy.No.37/B,
situated at Bommakal Grampanchayath of Rajvi Chaman of
Karimnagar Mandal and District. Suit consists of two items i.e.,
item No.I and item No.II.
8. Petitioner has filed common affidavit in I.A.Nos. 540 and 541
of 2023 in O.S.No.44 of 2016 to receive the certified copy of
judgment and decree in A.S.No.121 of 1992 dated 18.11.2012 and
to recall DW-1.
9. The learned trial Court has not gone into the written
statement filed by the petitioner-defendant No.1, wherein, he
specifically contended that appeal in A.S.No.121 of 1992 is allowed
on 08.11.2011 and the said document is material to prove his case.
10. The observations of the learned trial Court at paragraph No.6
and 7 are perverse and the same are liable to be set aside.
11. In view of the reasons stated above, Civil Revision Petition
Nos.3203 of 2023 and 3327 of 2023 are allowed and the common
order passed by the learned trial Court in I.A.Nos.540 of 2023 and
541 of 2023 dated 04.10.2023 are set aside, consequently, both
the applications i.e., I.A.No.540 of 2023 and I.A.No.541 of 2023 are
allowed.
13. Both the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed. There shall be
no order as to costs.
Interim orders if any stand vacated. Miscellaneous petition/s
shall stand closed.
______________________________
B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J
November 20, 2025
GNP
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.3203 and 3327 of 2023
November 20, 2025
GNP
