Three civil revision petitions under Article 227 challenging interlocutory orders in O.S. No. 547/2006 were dismissed as infructuous after the trial court decided the main suit. No costs awarded.
Petitions dismissed as infructuous; no stay granted; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3401 ]
\
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
CIVIL REVISION PETITION N os: 3865 2838 and 3871 of 2024
Civil Revision Petition No.3865 of 2024
Petition under Article 227 of the constitution of lndia, by setting set aside the order dated 21 -1 1 -2024 passed in l.A. No.3852 of zo24 in o.s.No.547 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the ll Additionat Chief Judge, City Civit Court, Hyderabad.
Between:
Both R/o F-lat No, 101, SwarnaBharath Enclave Near Ep Fund Organization, Regional office 3' Line, Krishna Nagar, pattabhipuram post Guitur Town, Andhra Pradesh- 522006.
...PETITIONER/PETITIONER
AND
(died as per LRs Dl'l to D15)
...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS
R7 to R20 are not necessary parties
',/ lA NO: 1 OF 2024 I/
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all the further proceedings in O.S.No.547 of 2006 by the Hon'ble Court of ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Ms. K. Annapurna Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Pramod Maligi
Civil Revision Petition No.2838 of 2O24
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, by setting set aside the order daled 27-08-2024 passed in l.A.No,2B16 of 2024 in O.S.No.547 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
Between:
Both R/o Flat No. 101 , SwarnaBharath Enclave Near EP Fund Organization, Regional office 3'd Line, Krishna Nagar, Pattabhipuram Post Guntur Town, Andhra Pradesh- 522006.
...PETITIONER/PETITIONER
AND
(died as per LRs Dl 1 to Dl5)
I
f I
...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS
I
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to stay all further proceedings in O.S.No.547 of 2006 on the file of the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, in the interest ofjustice.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Ms. K. Annapurna Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents No.'l & 2: Sri P. Vamshi Krishna
Civil Revision Petition No.3871 of 2O24
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, by setting set aside the order daled 21-11-2024passed in I.A.No.3B51 of 2024 in O.S.No.547 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
Between:
Both R/o Flat No_ 10 1 , SwarnaBharath Enclave Near EP Fund Organization, Regional office 3'" Line, Krishna Nagar, Pattabhipuram Post Guntur Town, Andhra Pradesh- 522006.
...PETITIONER/PETITIONER
AND
(died as per LRs Dl I to D15)
I
...RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS
R7 to R20 are not necessary parties
lA NO:'t OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleased to stay all the further proceedings in O.S.No.547 of 2006 by the Hon'ble Court of ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Ms. K. Annapurna Reddy
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. Pramod Maligi
The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER
7
THE HONOUTTABLESRI JUSTICESUJOY PAUL
CTVIL REVISION PETITIONNos.38652838 and 3871 of 2024
COMMON ORDER:
Ms. K. AnnapurnaReddy, learned counselfor the petitioners submitted that after filingthe present petitions,the main suit was decided by the trialCourt and therefore,the petitionshave rendered infructuous.
infructuous. There shall beno order as to costs. Miscellaleous applications pending, ifa-ny, shall stand closed
Sd/- N. SRIHARI ASSISTANTREGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
ECTIONOFFICER
\
To,
kam/gh ,'w
I I
HIGH COURT
DATED:0310112025
I
COMMON ORDER
lllE s 14
(
li(
c
t
narclr
CRP.Nos.3855, 2838 and 3871 of 2024
THE CIVIL REVISION PETITIONS ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS
ol
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the civil revision petitions are rendered infructuous by the disposal of the main suit by the trial court?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kurra Chandra Sekhara Azad
Kurra Savitri
V. Rajashekar
M. Gopala Krishna
Boppana Ranga Rao
CS Rao
Sujoy Paul
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
