The Single Judge held that since the underlying civil suit was dismissed for default after the revision was filed, the revision petition became infructuous and was dismissed.
Petition dismissed as infructuous. Miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.816 OF 2016
ORDER :
The present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner - plaintiff challenging the order dated 03.11.2015 passed by the learned VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, in I.A. No.381 of 2015 in O.S. No.2114 of 2012, whereby the petition filed under Section 65 of the Evidence Act seeking to receive certain photostat copies of the bills as secondary evidence, was dismissed.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the present revision, stand closed.
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J
November 8, 2018. Mgr
petitioner
M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
