Dismissed

Kunchepu Anand v. Smt. Khatija Begum

Telangana HC12 Sept 2014CRP/1923/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order dismisses a civil revision petition challenging the dismissal of an interim application to reopen a suit for leading further evidence. The High Court found no infirmity in the trial court's decision to reject the application as the claims were repetitive.

What did the court decide?

The civil revision petition is dismissed; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

Kunchepu Anand Vs Smt. Khatija Begum — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶2

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1923 OF 2014

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioners/defendants 1 to 3 questioning the order dated 04.06.2014 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad, wherein and whereby application in I.A.No.122 of 2014 in O.S.No.131 of 2005, filed by the petitioner/4^th defendant under Section 151 of C.P.C, seeking to reopen the suit for leading the further evidence by the defendants 1 to 4.

¶5

2) Originally the I.A.No.122 of 2014 was filed on 03.02.2014 with a prayer that there are certain aspects which need to be clarified particularly with regard to the total extent of the land held by the father of the 1^st defendant and his family members. This application has been opposed by the 1^st respondent/plaintiff and the Court below having considered the extensive arguments advanced on behalf of both parties declined to entertain the said petition and consequently dismissed the same. Hence, the present revision.

¶6

3) In the facts of the present case, a perusal of the order dated 04.06.2014 of the Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad in I.A.No.122 of 2014 in O.S.No.131 of 2005 would reveal that the Court below had considered the arguments of both the parties elaborately and the Court below found that there was no justifiable reason for reopening of the suit to enable him to rehear the case. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the impugned application would reveal that what has been stated in the impugned application and the counters are nothing but repetition of the respective parties’ claims. Taking into consideration of these aspects, the Court below had rightly dismissed the reopening application for rehearing the suit afresh. Inasmuch as the Court below categorically came to a conclusion basing on the material placed

¶7

before it and observed that there was no justifiable reason for reopening the suit for the purpose of rehearing. I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Court below in the circumstances.

¶8

4) Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending in this revision petition shall stand closed.

¶9

____________________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM Date:12.09.2014 Gk.

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶11

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1923 OF 2014

¶12

Date:12.09.2014.

¶13

Gk.

Kunchepu Anand v. Smt. Khatija Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunchepu Anand v. Smt. Khatija Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Methri Gangadhar Vs B. Devidas

Maruthi Vs Kondiba (died)

P.Ashok Vs The Government of Telangana

P.Narsingam, S/o Mallaiah Vs The Fisheremen Industries Cooperative Society Ltd.

Nulakani Veeranagaiah, Vs The Mandal Revenue Officer

A.Vimala Vs Smt. Padma