Disposed

Gattagalla Sukkamma v. Gattagalla Laxmaiah

Telangana HC6 Sept 2024CRP/2092/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a civil revision petition filed under Article 227, directing the trial court to expeditiously decide an interim application seeking an injunction against alienating suit property, noting the respondents did not appear.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to dispose of I.A.No.114 of 2020 expeditiously, preferably within a month of receipt of this order.

Gattagalla Sukkamma Vs Gattagalla Laxmaiah — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^26e7 ]

¶2

I I

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF^SEPTETMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENIY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{ABHINANDKUMAR SHAVILI}

¶7

CIVIL REVISION PETtTtoN^{2092 0F 2024}

¶8

Petition under Article 227 of^{Constitution of lndia aggrievedby the orderin} l.A.No. 114 0l 2020 in o.S.No.2327^{0f 2022 0n the file of the ll Additional Junior} Civil Judge Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri,^{at Medchal}

¶9

Between:

¶10

Gattagalla Sukkamma, Wo Late Yadaiah, Aged about 58^{years, Occ} Housewife, R/o H.NO.B-10, Edulabad Village, Ghatkesar^{Mandal, Ranga} Reddy District

¶11

Gattagalla Kousalya, D/o^{Late Yadaiah,Wo Pochaiah,ag-ed about 42.years.,} ocC Agriculture, ivb H.t{o.e-t04/'1,^{EdulabadVillage, Ghatkesar Mandal,} Ranga Reddy District

¶12

...PETITIONERS/PLAINTI^FFS

¶13

AND

¶14

'1 . Gaftagalla Laxmaiah, (died as per L.R.S)

¶15

Gattagalla Naresh, S/o G- Laxmaiah,^{Aged about35-years,-Occ.Agriculture'} R/o H:No.5-72, Edulabad^{Village, Ghatkesar l\tlandal,Ranga ReddyDistrict'}

¶16

Gudem Anjaneyulu,^{S/o Late G. Gandaiah, Ag-edabout} -65^years,Occ Agriculture,' R/o H.No.5-72,^{Edulabad Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga} Reddy District.

¶17

Gudem Yellamma, Wo^{G. Anianeyulu, Aged about60 years,Occ Agriculture,} nrc H ruo.S-ZZ, Edulabad^{Village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga ReddyDistrict}

¶18

...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS

¶19

lA No. 2 of 2024

¶20

Petition under section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition,the High court may be pleasedto} direct the ll Addl.^{Junior civil Judge court, Medchal-tvlalkajgiriat [/edchal to}

¶21

dispose of the lA.No.'114 of 2020 in O.S.No.2327 of 2022 pending disposal of the Civil Revision Petition

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Rapolu Bhaskar

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶27

C.R.P.No. 20920F 2024

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

Being aggrieved bythe non-disposal of I.ANo.114 of 2020 n O.S.No.2327 of 2022 (old O.S.No.75O of 2O2O) on the file of the II Additional Junior Gvil Judge, MedchalMalkajgfui District, at Medchal, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

¶30

2 Fleard Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, Ieamed counsel appearing for the petitioners.

¶31

It is the case of the petitioners thar they have filed O.S.No.2327 of 2022 for cancellation of Registered Agreement of Sale-cum-General Power of Attomey and along with the suit, theyhave also filed I.ANo.114 of ZOZO seeking to direct the respondenrc not to alienate the suit schedrileproperry to third parries till the disposal of the suit.

¶32

¶33

i- r',,rf1i:-.

¶34

Though four 1rears have lapsed, the trial Court has not yet disposed of the said I.A Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the civil revision petition by directing the trial C-ourt to dispose of I.ANo.114 of 2OZO in O.S.No.232Z of 2022., as expeditiotuly as possible.

¶35

Flaving considered the said submissions, this (burr is of the vieu, that though notices were served, none appeared for the respon,Jents. Therefore, ends of justice would be met if the present civil revision petition is disposed of by directing the trial C-ourt to dispose of I.ANo.114 of 2020.

¶36

Accordingly, the Gvil Revision Petition is disposed of directing the trial C-ourt to dispose of I.ANo.114 of 2O2O n O.S.No.2327 of 2022 on the file of the II Additional Junior Gvil Judge, M,edchal-Malkajgiri District, at Medchal, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of four

¶37

¶38

¶39

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No

¶40

costs.

¶41

Miscellaneous petitions, $ any, pending shall stand closed.

¶42

DDY sd/.PSgBffiBnEt,EF

¶43

¶44

,,TRUE^COPY// SECTI OFFICER at Medchal To, I jJJ,'f t?yl'-*:fl :3::*l3?ii3i'-Markalsn' 2 H?,tt,.J,SX'J 3 Two^{CD CoPtes} vH/gh

l I I I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0610912024

ORDER

( o1i. .\ riE > r, -- 9^
(1(
2
13 DEt iiju
C)
.a
t Dr t
S c,^, i .!+i o

¶51

CRP.No.2092 ot 2024

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE CRP

¶53

a{kruv .,'<br>

Gattagalla Sukkamma v. Gattagalla Laxmaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gattagalla Sukkamma v. Gattagalla Laxmaiah

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

Medaboina Saidulu Vs Shri Ravi Gupta, IPS

Manne Naveen Kumar Vs M. Surekha

Madhapati Shiva Nagulu Vs Sri Anil Kumar

Tummala Manjula Vs K.Lakshmi Devi

City Union Bank Ltd. Vs Prof Mohammed Aqther

G. Umashankar Vs Sri. Ankit Sarwa