The High Court dismissed a civil revision petition against an order rejecting an amendment application. The Court held that the petitioner's inaction in serving notice to the respondent, leading to prolonged delays, warranted dismissal.
The civil revision petition is dismissed; interim orders stand vacated; connected CRP disposed of as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.2731 of 2010
Dated 0 5 th February, 2013
Between:
Bestha Anantha Padmanababu
…Petitioner
and K.Kalyani
…Respondent
Counsel for the petitioner: Sri K.Srinivas
for Sri P.Narasimhulu Parise
Counsel for the respondent: ----
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This civil revision petition is filed against order, dated 04.03.2010, in I.A.No.711 of 2009 in O.S.No.196 of 2006, on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Gooty. A perusal of the proceeding sheet shows that even though the case was adjourned many times to facilitate the learned counsel for the petitioner to serve notice on the respondent, he has not filed proof of service.
The civil revision petition is filed against the order of the lower Court rejecting the application for amendment of the written statement. The order was passed as far back as 04.03.2010 in a suit pending since 2006. Because of the laxity on the part of the petitioner in serving notice on the respondent, the suit is kept pending. Even though this civil revision petition was filed in the year 2010 and more than 2½ years had elapsed since then, the petitioner failed to take steps to serve notice on the respondent. Therefore, I have no option
other than dismissing the civil revision petition for failure of the petitioner to take necessary steps.
The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the civil revision petition, Interim order, dated 13.07.2010, as extended on 14.09.2010, shall stand vacated and C.R.P.M.P.No.3672 of 2010 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
05th February, 2013 Note: The Registry shall dispatch a copy of this order to the lower Court as early as possible and return the record, if any, received. (b/o) VGB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the civil revision petition should be allowed despite the petitioner's failure to serve notice on the respondent.
Bestha Anantha Padmanababu
K.Kalyani
C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
