Remanded

Sunkara Ramakrishna v. Sunkara Srinivasa Rao

Telangana HC10 Dec 2021CRP/1526/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an interim order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate for quashing an application under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC. Noting the order was contrary to Supreme Court law and improper in directing police protection without a request, the High Court remanded the matter to be decided expeditiously within two months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remanded to Court below to dispose of I.A. No. 582 of 2021 expeditiously within two months.

Sunkara Ramakrishna Vs Sunkara Srinivasa Rao — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1526 OF 2021

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the order dated 24.06,2021 in 1.A.No.582 of 2021 in O.S.No.558 ol 2021 on the fite of the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, lVobile Court, Bhadrachalam.

¶8

Betwee n:

¶9

Sunkara Ramakrishna, S/o. Late Satyanarayana , Age 72 years, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. H.No.6-'19/1 , Gandhampalli Village Kothapeta Post, Bayyaram Ir,4andal Mahabubabad District.

¶10

Sunkara Venugopal, S/o. Ramakrishna, Age 46 years, Occ. Cultivation R/o. Flat No.402, Highrise, Krishna Residency Cheruku Thota Colony, Saroornagar Hyderabad

¶11

..PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶12

AND

¶13

Sunkara Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Late Satyanarayana, Age 63 years, Fl/o. As per Cause title, Rl/o. H.No.15-1, Kotha Thanda, (lndiara Nagar) Mulkanur ReVenue Village, Satyanarayanapuram G.P., and Post Garla Mandal, Mahabubabad Dist.

¶14

...RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF

¶15

lA NO: 2 OF 2021

¶16

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the orders passed by the Sub Divisional [Magistrate, Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam, in 1.A.No.582 o'f 2021 in O.S.No.558 of 2021 d1.24.6.2021 .

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI P. V. RAMANA

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent: SRI K. PAVAN KUMAR

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

HONOU^(ABLE SRt^{JUSTICE T.VINOI)KUMAR}

¶21

CIVIL REVISION I'ETITION^{No'1526 of 2021}

¶22

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard lea ned counsel for^{petitioners and leamed counsel} appearing for the respondent.

¶25

This Civi . Revision Petition is^{filed against the order} dt.24-06-2021 pr ssed in I.A.No.582^{of 2021 in O.S.No.558of 2021} on the file of the Sub-Divisional^{Magistrate& Special AssistantAgent} to Covernment, I 4obile Cotrrt^{at Bhadrachalarn.}

¶26

A perusal of the impugned^{order passccl by the (lourt below} indicates that thr same^{is bereli of reasonsand is contraryto the law} laid down by th^: Supreme^{Court in Shiv Kumar Chadha etc.,V/s'} Municipal Corl oration of^Delhir.

¶27

Further, ir is noticed^{that the Court below,while passingthe} order allowing tl^e I.A.,^{hasalsomarkeda copy of the saidorder to the} Station House C [ficer, Cherta,^{for giving police protection, for which} no application is made.

¶28

ln view c'the^{sante.thc impugned ordclpassedh1' theCor"rrt} below in 1.A.Nt.582 of^{2021 in O.S.No.558ot'2011 is set aside ancl} the matter is rer ritted back^{to the C'our1 belorv lirr being disposedof} alresh.

¶29

'(1993)^{3 scc 161}

¶30

)

¶31

Sincc Inrerlocurory Applications, like Order 39 Rule I C.p.C. etc., are filed seeking interim relief pending disposal of the suit, they are to be decided at the earliest possible time.

¶32

As such, on remand, the Court below is directed to dispose of I.A.No.582 of 202t in O.S.No.558 of 2021, pending on its file, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

The Civil Revision Peririon is disposed of, as abovc. No order as to costs.

¶34

9 As a scqr.rel. misccllarrcoLrs pctitions pending, if any, shall stand

¶35

closed.

¶36

SD/.K.ONESIM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 6

¶37

SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To,

¶39

The Sub Divisional Magistrate -cum- Spl. Assistant Agent, Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam.

¶40

One CC to Sri P. V. Ramana. Advocate IOPUC]

¶41

One CC to Sri K. Pavan Kumar, Advocate tOptjCt 4. Two CD Copies 5. One Spare Copy \ gbr p-

¶42

HIGH COURT

¶43

DATED: 1011212021

¶44

1tt E STA )€
( di
oo:.) 2 4 t)EC 2C?1 c,
,.J
.'I:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

CRP.No.1526^{c t 2021}

¶47

DISPOSING O:^{THE CRP}

¶48

r-\

Sunkara Ramakrishna v. Sunkara Srinivasa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunkara Ramakrishna v. Sunkara Srinivasa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Mahaabubnagar Grains and Seeds Merchants Association Vs The Commissioner and Director of Marketing Committee

Rice Millers Association rep by its Secretary Vs the Commissioner and Director of Marketing Committee

Rasi Seeds Ltd. Vs the Station of A.P and 51 Others

Guguloth Ramdas Vs Danasari Bayamma

Sri Vancha Veera Reddy Vs Smt. Pamela Satpathy and 2 Others

Bakka Pullaiah Vs The State of Telangana