Dismissed

Gudise Ratnaiah v. Gudise Devaiah

Telangana HC7 Apr 2021CRP/571/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution and Section 151 of the CPC, the High Court of Telangana dismissed the petition challenging an order refusing to condone a delay of 724 days in filing for setting aside an ex parte decree. The Court held that no valid explanation for the delay was forthcoming and refused to exercise its revisional jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Civil Revision Petition No. 571 of 2021 is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications pending stand closed.

Gudise Ratnaiah Vs Gudise Devaiah — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH^{DAY OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICECHALLA KODANDA RAM}

¶5

CIVIL REVISIO N PETITION^{NOi 571 0F 2021}

¶6

Petition under Afiicle 227 of constitution^{of lndia, aggrieved by the orderdated} 22t0112015 in lA No.922l2014^{in OS No.67of 2009 on the file of the Court of the Senior} Civil Judge, Sircilla.

¶7

Between:

¶8

Gudise Ratnaiah, S/o. Late Bakkaiah

¶9

...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Gudise Devaiah, S/o. Narasaiah'

¶12

Gudise Raiaiah, S/o.^Narasaiah, RJo. Ganjivagugadda Village. Vemulawada '^{Ir/andal,Karimnagar.).-} - ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT

¶13

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶14

Petition under section^{15'1 of cPC praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High courtmay be pleasedto suspend the common} order dated 2210112015^{in l.A. Nos.922 0t 2014, in o.s. No.670f 2009 0n the file of} the Senior Civil Judge, Siricilla.

¶15

For the Petitioner : SRI ERIGI^{GANESH,Advocate}

¶16

For the Respondents^:

¶17

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶18

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 571 of 2021 ORDER:

¶19

This Civil Revision Petition is llled questioning order dated 22.01 .2015 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sircilla in I.A.No.922 of 2014 in O.S.No.67 of 2009 filed for condoning the delay of 724 days in filing the petition for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 25.09.2012.

¶20

A perusal ofthe order under Revision discloses that except stating that the delay occurred on account of the ill-health of the father of the petitioner, no other material was placed with regard to the same. The medical certiflcate which the petitioner seeks to place on record even today is dated 15.02.2011. In other words, there is no explanation forthcoming.

¶21

In those circumstances, this Court is not inclined to exercise the Revisional^jurisdiction to interfere with the order under Revision.

¶22

Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is^dismissed However, it would be open to the^petitioner to take^{steps in} accordance with law.

¶23

¶24

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶25

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶26

Sd/-T.KRISHNA KUMAR ASSISTANT REGIS R ,TRUE COPY//

¶27

SECTION OFFICER

¶28

¶29

The Senior Civil Judge, Sircilla.

¶30

One CC to Sri E.Ganesh, Advocate (OPUC)

¶31

Two CD Copies

Ki., N/ a)

HIGH COURT

DATED:O71041202'l

!,
SIAT,E.
1
.>
1
;L
.Ci
co 2t APB?011
/
.a<br>-'i-:--.,::j-'-

ORDER

CRP.No.571 of 2021

DISMISSING THE CRP.

Gudise Ratnaiah v. Gudise Devaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gudise Ratnaiah v. Gudise Devaiah

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

K.Satyanarayana Vs Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S.

P.Santhamma Vs Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S. and Another

V.Radha, Vs Sri Lokesh Kumar D.S

D. Susheela Vs S.K.M Yousufuddin

N.Jayaprada Vs Sri K.Jangireddy

Kashetti Chandraiah, And 2 Others Vs Kashetti Raji Reddy