Disposed

Bathula Buchamma v. Karnati Nagarjuna

Telangana HC10 Jan 2025CRP/3831/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil revision petition challenging delay in disposal of an interlocutory application for injunction in a partition suit. The High Court held that the petitioner failed to file counter to the interim order application. The petition was disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to file counter and press for disposal of the interlocutory application.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to file counter in I.A. No. 96 of 2022 and press for disposal.

Bathula Buchamma Vs Karnati Nagarjuna — Partition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3831 OF 2024

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the order dated 08-11-2022 in LA No 96 of 2022 in O S. No. 104 of 2O22 on the file of the Court of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, at Devarakonda.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Bathula Buchamma, Wo Kanthaiah, Aged 67 Years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nasarlapally Village of Chintapally Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶10

...PETITIONER/DEFENDANT No. 2

¶11

AND

¶12

Karnati Nagarjuna, S/o. Ramulu, Age 27 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o Nasarlapally Village of Chintapally Mandal. Nalgonda District.

¶13

... RESPONDENT/PLAI NTIFF

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstan@s stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to stay all further proceedings in l.A. No 96 of 2022 in O.S. No.^1O4 of m22, on the file of The Addl. Junior Civil Judge, at Devarakonda.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

TI{E HON'tsLtr SRI JUSl'lCE I'. VINOD KUMr\R CIVIL REVISION P[r'l'lT|ON No.-1ti3l of 2(t24

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

Heard leamed counsel lor the petitioner, and perused the record.

¶22

This Revision Petition is filed aggrieved b.v the order dated 08-11-2022 passed in I.A.No.96 o12022 in O.S.No.104 of 2022

¶23

on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Devarakonda.

¶24

The petitioner herein is delendant No.2 in the suit.

¶25

Petitioner contends that the respondent herein as plaintiff had filed the suit for partition and separate possession ol'the suit schedule property vide O.S.No.t04 ol 2022 and obtained an interim order restraining the defendants fiont alienating the petition schedule property, and that the said order is being extended from time to time even though the petitioner has filed written statement in the aforesaid suit. Thus, petitioner contends that a direction be issued to the trial Couft to dispose o[ the aforesaid I.A. in a time bound manner.

¶26

¶27

A perusal of the record shoras that an interirn order was granted by the trial Couft and the said order was extended till 18-12-2024. Though, the peritioner hcrein conrends that the Court below is not taking up thc interlocutory application for hearing and disposal, it is nor shou,n to this Court of the petitioner having taken steps to get thc aloresaid interim order vacated by filing counter in the I.A.

¶28

6" In view of the above, this Courr is ol'the view that instead of directing the trial Couft to dispose ol I.A.No.96 of 2012 in a time bound manner, the petitioner should be directed to file counter in the I.A. and press fbr disposal ol- the said I.A.

¶29

Granting liberty as aforesaid. this C-ivil Revision petition is disposed of. No cosrs.

¶30

8 As a sequel, miscellaneous peririons pending il any shall

¶31

stand closed.

¶32

Sd/. P. PADMANABHA^REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

TION OFFICER

To,

The Additional Junior^{Civil Judge, at Devarakonda} Z. One CC to Sri Praveen^{Kumar Veerjala, Advocate} [OPUCI 3. Two CD Copies VH/glr Y{

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1010112025

1 nE s 14
t
o
0 4 r[8 2025
o7
i * n
1 c

ORDER

CRP.No.3831 of 2024

DISPOSING OF CRP

5.d6"[ &,,.

Bathula Buchamma v. Karnati Nagarjuna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bathula Buchamma v. Karnati Nagarjuna

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

Banothu Gopya, Vs The State of Telangana

Mudige Shruthi Vs The Telangana State Council for Higher Education

Nimma Rama Chandra Reddy, Vs State of Telangana

Mohammed Sameena Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Biru Surender Reddy Vs Ashwini Tanaji Wakhde, lAS

Mekala Poshetty Vs Sri Navin Mittal I.A.S