Dismissed

D. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o.Late D.Narsimha Raju v. M. Venkat Reddy, S/o M.Surender Reddy,Occu.Business

Telangana HC15 Apr 2021CRP/472/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the civil revision petition, ruled that the appealed suit was disposed of, and closed the revision and incidental appeals, noting that grounds were available in the appeal itself.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition closed. Miscellaneous applications closed. No order as to costs.

What the court decided

D. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o.Late D.Narsimha… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM

¶5

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 472 OF 2018

¶6

Petition under Arlicle 227 of Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the order dated 28.12.2017 in 1.A.No.749 of 2017 in O.S.No.2B of 2013 on the file of the Court of the Vll Additional District Judge at lvlahabubnagar.

¶7

Between:

¶8

D. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o.Late D.Narsimha Raju, Rl/o Lakshmivada village katrenakona (M), East Godavari

¶9

D. Srinivas Raju, S/o. D. Suryanarayana Raju, Fl/o. Mosalapalli Village, Ambajipet Mandal, East Godavari District.

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

IV. Venkat Reddy, S/o M.Surender Reddy, Occu.Business, R/o Marpaka Village, Nidamanoor Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased may be^pleased to stay all further proceedings in O.S.No.2B ol 2013 on the file of Hon'ble Vll Additional District Judge at Mahabubnagar, during the^pendency of the above CRP.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. D. MADHAVA RAO

¶17

Counsel forthe Respondent: SRl. C. KUMAR

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CIVIL REVI SION PETITION No. 472 of 2018 ORDER:

¶20

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging order dated 28.12.2017 passed by the learned VII Additional District Judge, Mahabubnagar, dismissing i.A.No.749 of 2017 in O.S.No.28 of 2013, filed by the petitioners herein, who are defendants in the suit, to send the documents to the Flandwriting Expert for comparison and opinion.

¶21

Now, as per the status repofi of District Coufts, Mahabubnagar, the said suit came to be disposed of on merits vide judgment and decree dated 27.09.201 8.

¶22

It is represented by the learr.red counsel for the petitioners as well as the respondent that A.S.No.1822 of 2018 also came to be filed against the judgment and decree dated 2i.09.2018 in O.S.No.28 of 2013.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that though the said suit stands disposed of, the petitioners may be given liberry to adduce additional evidence in the pending appeal for sending the same to the expert's opinion.

¶24

It is to be noted that the party, u,ho has filed appeal, is at liberty to raise all the grounds as are available to him including

¶25

the ground with respect^{to the I.A.s whicltare required to be}

¶26

considered by the Court^{below in accordance with law.}

¶27

Subject to the above,^this Civil^{Revision Petitionis closed.}

¶28

Miscellaneous applications, if^{any pending, shall stand}

¶29

closed. There shall be^{no order as to costs.}

¶30

Sd/.I.NAGA^{LAKSH MI} ASSISTANT^REGI

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The Vll^{AdditionalDistrictJudge at Mahabubnagar'}

¶35

One CC^{to Sri. D. Madhava Rao' Advocate[OPUC]}

¶36

One CC^{to Sri. C. Kumar' Advocate[OPUC]}

¶37

Two CD CoPies

gbr

*-.-

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1510412021

1 g S?A) [ UA
t
05 MAY ?021 j!
<br>.'l +

¶43

ORDER

¶44

CRP.No.472 of 2018

¶45

CLOSING THE CIVIL REVISION^PETITION.

¶46

0!+.,
'tto\o rt

D. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o.Late D.Narsimha Raju v. M. Venkat Reddy, S/o M.Surender Reddy,Occu.Business

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

D. Satyanarayana Raju, S/o.Late D.Narsimha Raju v. M. Venkat Reddy, S/o M.Surender Reddy,Occu.Business

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

Safia Mahmood Ali, S/O Late Syed Mahmood Ali, Occ. Household Vs Garudapalli Shabarisha, S/O Late G. Ashok Kumar, Occ. Business

M/S Essence Hospitality Vs Roger Hessing

M/S Essence Hospitality and M/S Via Milano Hyderabad Vs Roger Hessing

Andhra Pradesh Housing Board Vs Mrs. Laiq Fatima

Smt.S. Keshava, Vs Smt.K.Parvati Rao

Jeengarala Venkat Reddy, Mahabubnagar Dist Vs Jeengarala Sathyamma, Mahabubnagar Dist and 6 Others