The High Court of Telangana dismissed a civil revision petition filed under Article 227. The Court refused to grant a stay or interfere with the lower court’s order dismissing an application for setting aside an ex parte order due to the petitioner's negligence.
Discontinued; stay of proceedings not granted; Civil Revision Petition dismissed.
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.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
CIVIL REVISION PETITION N O: 553 OF 2021
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the docket order dt.14.06.2019 in 1.A.No.669 of 2017 in O.S.No.253 ol 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar.
Between:
Buchala Mallesham, s/o Late Rajaiah, aged about 51 years, occ. RTC Employee, R/o Elabotharam village, Karimnagar Mandal and District.
.....PETITIONERY PETITIONER/ DEFENDANT
AND
Kompaili Sujatha, w/o Narayana Babu, aged about 36 years, occ. Household, R/o Q.No.F-172, H.No. 1-6-77, A-Colony, Ramagundam Town
.....RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF
lA NO: 1 OF 2021
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all furlher proceedings in O.S.No.253 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar, pending disposal of the main C.R.P., in the interest of justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. N HARI PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent: --
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CIVL REVISION PETITION No. 553 of 2021
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is fi1ed against the docket order dated 14.06.2019 passed by the learned principal Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, dismissing I.A.No.669 of 2017 in O.S. No.253 of 2016, filed by petitioner/defendant for sefring asid,e ex parte order dated 27 .02.2017 .
Respondent herein filed the aforesaid suit for perpetual injunction restraining the petitioner from interfering with the possession of the suit schedule property. In spite of receipt of the suit summons, no written statement was filed by the petitioner within the stipulated period of 90 days, hence, he was set ex parte on 24.01 .2017. Thereafter, the petitioner fited the aforesaid I.A. on 19.07.2017. Admittedly, the petitioner did not seek condonation of delay in filing the written statement nor even filed written statement along with the said I.A. Hence, the Court below passed the order under revision dismissing the said I.A.
From a perusal of the order under revision, it is clear that Copy Application for obtaining certified copy of the order under revtslon was filed by the petitioner on 07.01 .2021, lt is to be noted that this Civil Revision petition itself came to be filed on
2
c.B.p.u..ss. "iliii
30'03'2021 i.e.' almost one year and seven months after passlng the order under revision.
Though the learned counsel for the petitioner pleads indulgence of this Court to give an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the suit, in the facts ofthe present case, considering the negligence that is being shown by the petitioner, this court is not inclined to interfere with the order under revision.
Accordingly, this Civil Revision petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shali stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
N.GHANDRA SEHKAR RAO ASSISANT REGISTRAR
/iTRUE COPY//
\
SECTION OFFICER
To,
HIGHCOURT
DATED:04t0612021
ORDER
hE ST4 r(.
d 21Jtlt{2o2t
CRP.No.553of 2021
DISMISSING THE CRP
WITHOUT COSTS
f-
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the dismissal of a civil revision petition for default in filing a written statement.
Whether the petitioner's delay in filing applications warrants setting aside the ex parte order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Buchala Mallesham
Kompaili Sujatha
Challa Kodanda Ram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
