##PAGE1##

1

2026:APHC:4535

APHC010459182025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3209]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

SATURDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos: 2352 and 2347 of 2025

C.R.P.No.2352 of 2025

Between:

1. K.KESAVA REDDY, S/o K.BALA KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 74

YEARS, OCC: CULTIVATION, R/O D.No.1/1A, SIVALAYAM STREET,

KARVETI NAGARAM TOWN AND POST, KARVETI NAGARAM

MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. K.KRISHNAIAH, S/o.K.MUNIRATNAM, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

OCC: BUSINESS, R/o.BOUND STREET, KARVETI NAGARAM

TOWN, KARVETI NAGARAM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. Mr.V NITESH

Counsel for the Respondent:

1. Mr.KANDERI CHETHAN

2

2026:APHC:4535

The Court made the following Common Order:

Civil Revision Petition No.2347 of 2025 is filed against the order dated

15.07.2025 in I.A.No.13 of 2025 in O.S.No.24 of 2017 on the file of the Court

of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puttur.

2. Civil Revision Petition No.2352 of 2025 is filed against the order dated

15.07.2025 in I.A.No.14 of 2025 in O.S.No.24 of 2017 on the file of the Court

of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puttur.

3. The petitioner herein filed the said suit against the respondent /

defendant for permanent injunction restraining the defendant, his men, agents

etc., from in any way interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and

enjoyment over the plaint schedule property. Along with the plaint, a list with

about 13 documents was filed on behalf of the petitioner / plaintiff. The

respondent / defendant filed written statement and contesting the suit. During

the course of adducing evidence, the petitioner / plaintiff filed the above

mentioned I.A.No.13 of 2025 under Order 7, R.14 (1) and Section 151 of

C.P.C., to condone the delay in filing the Original Power of Attorney dated

11.09.2009 executed by one Rajeswari @ Ramadevi, wife of M.Ramesh

Varma in favour of one A.Gopal Raju and I.A.No.14 of 2025 under Order 18

Rule 17 and Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure to recall P.W.1 and to

mark the said document dated 11.09.2009 to prove his case. Vide separate

docket orders dated 15.07.2025, the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division),

dismissed the applications. Aggrieved by the same, the instant revisions came

to be filed and are disposed of by this Common Order.

3

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the

impugned orders are not sustainable, as the learned Trial Court went wrong in

not considering the matter in the proper perspective. He submits that the

document which is sought to be marked is original Power of Attorney dated

11.09.2009 and the said document is crucial to prove petitioner’s case. He

submits that as the said document was not filed at the time of instituting the

suit, P.W.1 was sought to be recalled for the purpose of marking the same. He

further submits that the learned Trial Court ought to have appreciated that

recalling of the witness / P.W.1 for the purpose of marking additional

document, even at the belated stage of the suit can be considered, if the

document is essential for proper and effective adjudication of the dispute, that

by marking the said document, no prejudice would be caused, further that it

would be subject to proof, relevancy etc. Making the said submissions and

contending that the impugned orders are liable to be set aside, the learned

counsel seeks to allow the Revision Petitions. He also placed reliance on the

decision of a learned Judge of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at

Hyderabad in Bada Bodiah & Another v. Bada Linga Swamy & Ors., 2026:APHC:4535 .

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent made

submissions to sustain the impugned order. He submits that while there is no

dispute with regard to the settled position that the documents, which are

relevant for proper adjudication of the lis that are not filed along with suit, can

be filed subsequently, by