Allowed

Smt. Donthi Reddy Anitha v. The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC1 Dec 2021WP/11200/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Writ Petition filed to set aside an ex-parte order passed by the Cooperative Tribunal. The Court allowed the petition, set aside the order dated 29-07-2016, and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for de novo consideration.

What did the court decide?

The impugned ex-parte order dated 29-07-2016 in OP No. 26 of 2015 was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for de novo consideration.

Smt. Donthi Reddy Anitha Vs The State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY,^{THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND^TWENTYONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{T.VINOD KUMAR}

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.^{11200 0F 2017}

¶6

Between:

¶7

1 Smt. Donthi Reddy^{Anitha,W/o D. Janaki Reddy Aged about-40 years,.Occ:} aurin"J. Ryo flaf ruo.^{53, BlockNo. 14, Janailriy-Arvind Avenue, Church} Colonv, Ramanthapur,^{Hyderabad - 500013}

¶8

2 O. lu,iiti n"OOv, 5lo O^{'Coprl Reddy Aged about43.years, Occ: BusinessRio} Flat No, 53, Block No.^{14, Janapriya ArvindAvenue,Church uolony'} Ramanthapur, Hyderabad^- 500013

¶9

...'ET.T.ONERS

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana^Rep by^{its Principal Secretary,Co-opTribunal,} Chandravihar Complei,^{Nampally Hyderabad}

¶12

Viswi Sharatl",i ttlirtuaity^{Aided'C6operative Credit-Society'LJq} '.^{Rep by its} Director/Authorized Signatory,^{sri. K. Dayanand s/o Latesrrnlvasan,:z-z-} Tllzilota, Opp: SBl, S-hivam-Road,^{New Nallakunta,Hyderabad}

¶13

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶14

2 Sri. M. Ramchandra^{Kapardi, Sio N/. Ramdas'aged} -about^{51 years..Occ:} Business, R/o Flat No.^{155, Block No. 14' Janapriya Arvind Avenue,Church} Colony, Ramanthapur,^{Hyderabad - 500013}

¶15

...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT^NO.3

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of^{the constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High court may be pleased} to issue Writ/ Order or^{direction moreparticularlyone in the natureof Writ of} Mandamus in orderto set^{aside the orderin oP No. 2612015 dt.29-07-20160n the} file of Cooperative Tribunal^{at Hyderabadand consequently permit the Petitionerto} contest the matter by^{remanding the matter to the Tribunal as decree passedin an} exparte order.

¶17

W PMP. NO: 13914OF 2017

¶18

Petition under section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High Court may be pleasedto stay all} further proceedings of order in OP No.^{26115 Dt.29.07.2016 on the file of} Cooperative tribunal at Hyderabad^{and orders maybe passed accordingly in the} interest of^justice.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶20

Petition under Section 15'1 CPC^praying thatⁱⁿ the circumstances^{stated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court^{may be pleasedto stay the} Sale Notice dt.19.03.2018 and orders may be^{passed accordingly.}

¶21

lA NO:^{1 OF 20',l9}

¶22

Between:

¶23

Ivl/s.ViswaBharathMutuallyAidedCooperativeCreoitSocletyLtd',Registered office at:^{2-2'1132t111r,'ciJiis ii i sniu"'il Road' New Nallaku'ria'Hvderabadrep'} bv their oirector^{& A rho;JJd Ei;;;;'y: S;i ri bivanano S/o Late SrinivasanR/o} Hyderabad ....pETrfloNEFyRESPoNDENT^No.2

¶24

....pETrfloNEFyRESPoNDENT^No.2

¶25

AND

¶26

l.DonthiReddyArtha,w/oD.JanakiReddyAgedabout40years'occ:Business R/o Flat^{No. 5i, Bi#k"ffi' 14"'L'n'piiva"p'*indAvenue' ChurchColonv'} 'Rl-maninaPur, H' derabad - 500013

¶27

2 D. Janaki neoov^{slJ"oltopJHJlovAged about43 vears occ: BusinessR/o} Flat No. 53,^{t loc"k} -rtf J - i +' Janbpriya Arvind Avenue Church Colony' iiimaninapur'H'derabad-500013 ...RES,.NDENTS/'ET'T'.NERS

¶28

The State^{of Te rngana.Rep qy iF. P,r.l!9li^q]Secretary'Co-Operative Tribunal'} Chandravihar^{Cc nplex, NampallyHyoeraDao'}

¶29

Pettion under^{s ection'151 CPC prav ns t,,; :::::;:'=:l;:::::::-:} the affidavit^{firedin su1 port of the petition,the High courtmay be preased to vacate} thelnterimordersdatrd17.04.201Bpassedinl.A.No.1of2018inW.P.No.11200 of2ol1bydismissing,]eWritPetitionwithexemplarycostsintheinterestofjustice.

¶30

Counsel for^{the Petiti< ners: SRI PASHAM KRISHNA REDDY}

¶31

Counsel for^{the Resptndent No'1:GP FORCOOPERATION}

¶32

Counsel for^{the Respr ndent No'2:SRI MALIPEDDI SRINIVAS REDDY'} STANDING^COUNSEL

¶33

Counsel for^{the ResPr ndent No'3: -}

¶34

The Court^{made the fi llowing: ORDER}

¶35

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶36

WRIT PETITION No.112OO of 2OL7

¶37

ORDER:

¶38

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Cooperation appearing for 1"t respondent and Sri Malipeddi Srinivas Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for 2"d respondent. With their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposed of at the stage of admission.

¶39

This Writ Petition is filed questioning the order in OP.No.26l2015 dt.29.O7.20 16 on the file of the Cooperative Tribunal at Hyderabad.

¶40

Though various grounds are raised in the Writ^Petition challenging the order passed by the Tribunalⁱⁿ OP.No.26/2015, suffice to mention that one^{such groundof} challenge is as to the^{impugned orderpassed beingex-parte,} as the petitioner did not choose to appear^{and contest the} mater despite service of notice.

¶41

Learned counsel for the^{petitioners contends that if this} Court were to give an opportunity^{to petitionersby setting} aside the ex-parte order, they would^{participate inthe} proceedings before the Tribunal whereupon the Tribunal^can consider the claims of the^parties on merits^{whichwould sub-} serve the ends of justice. However, the petitioners do not

¶42

¶43

¶44

dispute the fact^{of taking loan from the 2"d respondent-} Society.

¶45

Per cc rtra, learned^{Standing counsel appearing for 2"d} respondent submits^{that the Tribunal had set the petitioners} ex-parte in^{he proceedings because of their non appearance,} even after sr rvice^{of notice. He however, doesnot disputethe} fact that gr anting an^{opportunityto the petitioners to put} forth their^{, ,ontentionwould not causeany prejudice to the} claim of the 2"d respondent.^{Learnedcounsel would however} submit tha^{petitionersshould not take advantageof the} indulgence being^{shown by this Court to drag on the} proceedings by seeking^{adjournmentsbefore the Tribunal}

¶46

Havin; ; regard to the^{submissions made and considering} the fact tha : the^{impugned order is art ex-parte orderpassed} by the Cot^{perative Tribunal against the petitioners' this} Court is of :he^{view that interestsof justiceu'ould be met if} the Award 1^{,assed by the Tribunal is set aside and matter is} remitted ba,:k^{to the Tribunal for denouoconsideration'}

¶47

Accorr ingly, this^{Writ Petitionis allowed; the impugned} order dt.29 07.2016^{in OP'No.26} l2Ol5^{of the Cooperative} Tribunal, H^{rderabad,is set aside;and the matter is remitted} back to tht Tribunal^{fot denouo considerationlt is made} clear that t^{re petitioners/ respondents 1 & 2 in the said OP'} sha1l appea'before^{the Tribunalwithout causing any delay in}

¶48

¶49

the Tribunal^{taking up the matterand disposing of the same'} Further, it is^{needless to observe that as the matter is of the} year 2015, the Tribunal^{shall endeavor to dispose of the above} OP as expeditiously^{as possible, preferably within a period of} one year from^{the date of receipt of a copy of this order'No} order as to^costs

¶50

B Consequentlv,^{miscellaneouspetitions pending'if any'} shall stand^closed

¶51

That Rule^{Nisi has been made absolute as above'} Witness the^{Hon'ble the GHIEF JUSTIC-E SATISH CHANDRASHARMA' on this} Wednesday,^{the First o"V Ji'O-"""'Gr'iwo Thousand and Twenty One'}

¶52

SD/.I.NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT^REqISTRAR I\ , //TRUE^{COPY/ I} sECTION Ot/rtcen

¶53

to'',. ,n" Principal Secretary, Co-op Tribunal' State of Telangana Chandravihar ComPlex,^{NamPallYHvderabad} 2. The viswa^{enaraiiii""#;ilittvniouo. C^oooerative Credit Society'Ltd'} Director/Authorized^{'''sig;ai;li,''sii --xbavanand s/o Late srinivasan'} 2-2-1 1 321^{I oI A,opp, JelY, Sitl"limioao't'le* Nillakunta'Hvderabad} a. bne'c6-io^{-sii'pl3hl,-(tiinniReoov'Ro'ocateroPucl} 4. Two ccs to^{Gp t#'iJ-3i,J,riit"-ilibticouri ior the'State of Telansana at} s. Hvderabad. 6i,;"bci;^{drI Maiipedoi Srinivas Reddy, Standing} [OUT]^{counsel(OPUC)}

¶54

Two CD^CoPies. 7. One SPare^CoPY. \k

N/P

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 11211',021

ORDER

:i Ii\ )-Ii c <br>q
23 DElitr'

¶61

WP.No.11200 c f 2017

¶62

ALLOWING THI: WRIT^PETITION WITHOUT COS S I 7<sup>\r

Smt. Donthi Reddy Anitha v. The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Donthi Reddy Anitha v. The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary

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

M/s. Venkateshwara ginning and Pressing Mill Vs T.S state Financial Corporation Karimnagar Branch

M/s. Venkateshwara Ginningand Pressing Mill Vs A.P. State Financial Corporation Karimnagar Branch

P. Naresh Kumar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Jilkapally Laxman Vs The Chief General Manger(Commercial)

Kancharla Gopala Krishna Rao Vs Government of India

M/s Continental Fertilisers Pvt. Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana