Allowed

Sri Jyothi Swaroop Gattani v. Sri Talakokkulwar Lachanna

Telangana HC7 Aug 2025CRP/2713/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A revision petition challenged the dismissal of an application to set aside an ex-parte decree on the sole ground that the suit was already disposed of. The High Court held that reasoning legally unsustainable, set aside the trial court's order, and remanded the application for fresh adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 30.06.2025 set aside; I.A.No.182 of 2024 restored to the trial court to be decided afresh on merits.

Sri Jyothi Swaroop Gattani Vs Sri… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁸⁵ J

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2713 OF 2025

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the Order dated 3010612025 Passed in 1.A.No.182 of 2024in OS No.18 of 2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Adilabad

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri Jyothi Swaroop Gattani, S/o. Sri M.C. Gattani, aged about 59 years, Occ. service R/o. 83, Colony No.1, Andheri, Deori Tahsil Masuda Ajmer district^- 305 901, Rajasthan, and presently at DLF Epitome Building No.5, Tower-B, 9th Floor Cyber City DLF Phase-ll Sector-ll, Gurugram

¶10

...Petitioner/Defendant No.4

¶11

AND

¶12

Sri Talakokkulwar Lachanna, S/o. Sri Ramulu, aged about 57 years Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Shivaji Chowk, Bela mandal, Adilabad district.

¶13

Smt. Alshetty Devu Bai, Wo. late Sri Ramulu, aged about 52 years Occ. Household, R/o. H.No.2-12, Mangurla village, Jainath mandal, Adilabad district.

¶14

Sri Alshetty Satish, Wo. Late Sri Ramulu, aged about 33^years Occ. Agriculture, R/o. H.No.2-12, Mangurla village Jainath mandal, Adilabad district.

¶15

Smt. Alshetty Pochakka, Wo. Late Sri Ramulu aged about 30^years, Occ. Agriculture R/o. H.No.2-12, Mangurla village, Jainath mandal, Adilabad district.

¶16

(Respondents No.2 to 4 are not necessary parties to this revision)

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order staying execution of the judgment ind decree dated 10-02-2022 pas,sed in OS.No.18/2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Adilabad, including the execution proceedings in E.P.No.8/2023, in the interest of justice.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHYAM S AGRAWAL

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents: _

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

TTIE^{HONOURABTE SMT' JUSTICE K' SUJANA} 1

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This^{Civil RevisionPetitionisfiled bY the Petitioner'} aggrieved^{by the order dated 30'06'2025passed' in I'A'No'182} of 2O24in^{O'S'No'18 of 2015 on the file of the learned Senior} Civil Judge,^Adilabad'

¶26

The^{brief facts of the petition are that I'A'No' 182 of 2024} was^{filed under Order lX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of} CPC,^{seeking to set aside trre ex partedecreedated' \O'O2'2O22} passed^{in the suit' The respondent frled a counter opposing} the application'^{However' the trial Courtdisposed of the} petitiononthegroundthatthesuithadalreadybeend'isposed of and^{held that the petition was not maintainable'}

¶27

3 Heard^{Sri ShYam S Agarwal'learned counselfor the} petitioner

¶28

4 Learned^{counsel for the petitionersubmittedthat the} impugned^{order does not disclose any reasons or findingsin} When an^{aPPlicationis filed} support^{of such conclusion'}

¶29

SKS.J CRP.No.27l3 of 202,5

¶30

¶31

under order IX Rure 13 cpc to set aside arr ex partedecree, the mere fact that the suit has been disposecr of cannot be a valid gr'und to dismiss the petition without examining its merits' 'rherefore, prayed the court to arow this civil Revision Petition.

¶32

5' In 'riew of the submissions made by the Iearned counsel to:,tn" petitioner and upon a pen-lsar of the materiar availabre on recorcl' this court finds that the triar court erred in disposing I.A.No. 1g2 0f 2024 without even referring to the nature of application nor the pleading. petition under order IX Rule 1'3 is filed to set aside ex-parte decree which itserf means suit already disposed of. The application, hled under order IX Rure 13 cpc to set aside an ex partociecree, was rejected sorery on trre ground that the suit had arready been disposed of, which is an incorrect and rega,y unsustainable reasoning' Therefore, the order dated 30.06.2025 passed in I'A'No'182 0f 2024 in o.s.No.lg of 2015 0n the fre of the learned senior civ, Judge, Ad,abad, is riabre to be set aside.

¶33

6 Accorclingly, the civil Revision petition is arowed. The impugned order dated 30.06.2025 is set aside and the matter

¶34

: tII !

¶35

sKs,J CRP.No.27l3 of 2025

¶36

¶37

¶38

is remanded to the trial Court with a direction to restore I.A.No. L82 of 2024 and dispose of it afresh after hearing both parties and decide the same on merits in accordance with law.

¶39

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶40

SD/. L.VIJAYA LAXMI ASISSTANT REGISTRAR

/TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Senior Civil Judge, Adilabad.

¶46

One CC to Sri Shyam S Agrawal, Advocate IOPUC]

¶47

Two CD Copies

ABzuPSL

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0710812025

) I :l
,,
: 2l ri0t/ ru,
r0
t
a.rt f Ur le- t1

¶52

ORDER

¶53

CRP.No.2713 ot 2025

¶54

ALLOWING THE CIVIL REV]SION PETITION

¶55

fltfu'

Sri Jyothi Swaroop Gattani v. Sri Talakokkulwar Lachanna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Jyothi Swaroop Gattani v. Sri Talakokkulwar Lachanna

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

Mettu Mahendar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Thakurr Shekwar Ram Kumar Vs Suhash Deshpande

Somala Venkatesh Vs The state of Telangana

Voruganti Jyothi Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.B.Susheela, Vs Smt. K.Swarupa Rani

A.Chadramohan Vs The State of Telangana