Allowed

Sri Jwalads Hansraj (died Per L.Rs) v. Smt. Aruna Ben

Telangana HC20 Oct 2014CRP/3551/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order allowed two Civil Revision Petitions against a Rent Controller who dismissed interim applications for summoning documents due to unpaid process fees. The court set aside the impugned order and granted the petitioners 15 days to pay the fees, acknowledging their delay was due to customary funeral functions.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petitions 3551 and 3555 of 2014 allowed; impugned orders set aside; I.A Nos.326 and 327 of 2014 allowed with 15 days time to pay process.

Sri Jwalads Hansraj (died Per L.Rs) Vs Smt. Aruna Ben — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY

¶2

CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos. 3551 AND 3555 OF 2014

¶3

Dated:20-10-2014

¶4

Between: Sri Jwaladas Hansraj (died) and six others

¶5

... PETITIONERS

¶6

AND

¶7

Smt. Aruna Ben and four others

¶8

.. RESPONDENTS

¶9

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY

¶10

CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos. 3551 AND 3555 OF 2014

¶11

COMMON ORDER:

¶12

Both the revisions arise out of a common order dated 22-082014 passed by the Principal Rent Controller-cum-XII Junior Civil Judge, Hyderabad in I.A Nos.326 and 327 of 2014 in R.C No. 172 of 2012. The respondents filed R.C No.172 of 2012 against the petitioners for eviction from the suit schedule properties. The enquiry in the R.C commenced. I.A Nos. 243 and 244 were filed by the petitioners for summoning the original challans that are said to be part of record in R.C No.902 of 1988 in the Courts of III Additional Rent Controller and IV Additional Rent Controller. Since the process was not paid, the learned Rent Controller dismissed the applications through order 30-07-2014. Hence, I.A Nos.326 and 327 of 2014 were filed to set aside the order dated 30-072014. The learned Rent Controller dismissed both the applications by taking note of the fact that the petitioners can obtain the certified copies of the said challans at the stage of adducing evidence. Hence, these two revisions.

¶13

Heard Ms. Manjiri S. Ganu, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.A. Atchutanand, learned counsel for the

¶14

respondents.

¶15

The petitioners made an effort to summon certain documents which are part of record of R.C No.902 of 1989. It is no doubt true that there was some failure on the part of the petitioners in complying with the requirement as to payment of process. In the affidavit filed in support of the I.As, it was mentioned that the father of the 1^st petitioner herein expired recently and the failure to pay the process was on account of performance of customary functions. This Court is of the view that the petitioners deserve to be given an opportunity.

¶16

Hence, the C.R.Ps are allowed and the orders under revision are set aside. I.A Nos.326 and 327 of 2014 shall stand allowed and the petitioners are granted 15 days time to pay the process.

¶17

The miscellaneous petitions filed in this revision shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶18

___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J

¶19

20-10-2014 ks

Sri Jwalads Hansraj (died Per L.Rs) v. Smt. Aruna Ben

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Jwalads Hansraj (died Per L.Rs) v. Smt. Aruna Ben

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Srinivas Rao Vs Smt.Vuddanti Lakshmi

Mohd. Fakhruddin Vs The Chief Executive Officer

The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad Vs Goverdhan

Ranjeet Singh Khanuja Vs Omprakash Purohit

Gummadi Padmavathi Vs G Padma

C.Ramesh Reddy Vs Dr. Doodala Bharathi