K. Vamshi Krishna Rao VS K. Hari Prasad Rao

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
K. Vamshi Krishna Rao – Appellant
Versus
K. Hari Prasad Rao – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Zeeshan Adnan Mahmood, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Sunil B Ganu, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2 to 6: None Appeared

ORDER (COMMON)

These revision petitions have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the common Order dated 25.01.2022 passed in I.A.Nos.810 and 811 of 2021 in O.S.No.45 of 2021 by the learned XII Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, whereunder, the petitioner/defendant No.1 filed two application seeking to summon the witnesses, are dismissed.

2. Since two revision petitions filed against the common order and as the grounds under which the revision petitions are filed are one and the same and as the learned counsel appearing for both the parties advanced their respective arguments in both revisions as such, it is proposed to dispose of both the revisions under the common Order.

3. As can be seen from the impugned Order in the revision petitions, the petitioner/defendant No.1 filed interlocutory applications under Order XVIII, Rule 6 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘C.P.C.’) seeking permission to examine Mrs.Maya Kishandas Sachdev, W/o late Kishandas Sewaram Sachdev, as a witness on his behalf out of turn i.e., even before the actual trial is commenced in O.S.No.45/2021.

4. In support of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document