Back
APHC010270682024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3333]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1378/2024 Between:
1. M RS RIZWANA PARVEEN, W/O SHARFUDDIN KHAN AGE- 44 YEARS, OCC-MUSLIM, R/O 14-501, DASTHAGIRIPETA, PRODDATUR TOWN, KADAPA DISTRICT REP BY HER GPA
2. J EELAN KHAN, S/O GOOTY SHAIK BA AGE-65 YEARS, OCC-
BUSINESS, R/O NEHA NAGAR, GOOTY, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. MD IBRAHIM, SINCE DEAD REP BY LRS R8 TO R12
2. NOOR AHMED, S/O SHAIK FAREED, AGE-60 YEARS, OCC-REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 77-386, KALLUR, KUMOOL DISTRICT
3. S K MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O SHAIK FAREED, AGE-48 YEARS, OCC- REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 18-198-2-1, KALLUR, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
4. IQBAL BASHA S/O ABDUL WAHAB, AGE-45 YEARS, OCC-REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 41-473-6, KOTHAPETA, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
5. MAQBOOL BASHA, S/O ABDUL WAHAB, AGE-32 YEARS, OCC-
REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 76-97-35-3, WEAKER SECTION COLONY, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
6. PINJARI ISMAIL, S/O P.KHASIM SAHEB, AGE- 24 YEARS, OCC-
REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 2-20, BC COLONY, REMATA VILLAGE KURNOOL MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
7. RAMA NAIDU, S/O BAZARANNA, AGE- 40 YEARS, OCC- REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 76-111-4-IB, BELLARY CHOWRASTHA, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
8. MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O IBRAHIM, AGE- 49 YEARS, OCC- REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
9. S PERVEEN BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE-48 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
10. S NASEEMA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE- 32 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
11. S FATIMA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE-28 YEARS, OCC-HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT
12. S REHANA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE- 26 YEARS, OCC- HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tobegs to submit the Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition against the Orders dt. 10.05.2024 passed in IA.No.103 of 2024 in OS.No.120 of 2014 on the file of the Honble Court of Judge, Family Court Cum IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Kurnool.
IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 May be pleased to stay all further proceedings in OS.No.l20 of 2014 on the file of the Hon‘ble Court of Judge, Family Court Cum IV Additional District &
Sessions Judge Kurnool pending Revision in this Court and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pleased to extend the Interim Orders dt.02.08.2024 passed in lA.No.1 of 2024 in CRP.No.1378 of 2024 on the file of this Hon‘ble Court, pending disposal of the Civil Revision and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA
2.
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1967/2024 Between:
1. M RS RIZWANA PARVEEN, W/O SHARFUDDIN KHAN AGE 44 YEARS, OCC MUSLIM, R/O 14-501, DASTHAGIRIPETA, PRODDATUR TOWN, KADAPA DISTRICT REP BY HER GPA JEELAN KHAN S/O GOOTY SHAIK BA AGE 65 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O NEHA NAGAR, GOOTY, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND
1. MD IBRAHIM SINCE DEAD, REP BY LRS R8 TO R12
2. NOOR AHMED, S/O SHAIK FAREED, AGE 60 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 77-386, KALLUR, KUMOOL DISTRICT
3. S K MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O SHAIK FAREED, AGE 48 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 18-198-2-1, KALLUR, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
4. IQBAL BASHA, S/O ABDUL WAHAB, AGE 45 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 41-473-6, KOTHAPETA, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
5. MAQBOOL BASHA, S/O ABDUL WAHAB, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 76-97-35-3, WEAKER SECTION COLONY, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
6. PINJARI ISMAIL, S/O P.KHASIM SAHEB, AGE 24 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 2-20, BC COLONY, REMATA VILLAGE KUMOOL MANDAL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
7. RAMA NAIDU, S/O BAZARANNA, AGE 40 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 76-111-4-IB, BELLARY CHOWRASTHA, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
8. MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O IBRAHIM, AGE 49 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
9. S PERVEEN BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 48 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
10. S NASEEMA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
11. S FATIMA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 28 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
12. S REHANA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 26 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT (NO RELIEF CLAIMED IN THIS CRP AGAINST RESPONDENTS 2 TO 5, 8 TO 12 THE UNCONTESTED RESPONDENTS IN IA.NO.93 OF 2024)
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toMemorandum of Civil Revision Petition against the Docket Orders dt. 10.05.2024 passed in IA.No.94 of 2024 in OS.No. 120 of 2014 on the file of the Hon'ble Court of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge Kurnool Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA
2.
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1966/2024 Between:
1. M RS RIZWANA PARVEEN, W/O SHARFIIDDIN KHAN AGE 44 YEARS, OCC MUSLIM, R/O 14-501, DASTHAGIRIPETA, PRODDATUR TOWN, KADAPA DISTRICT REP BY HER GPA JEELAN KHAN S/O GOOTY SHAIK BA AGE 65 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O NEHA NAGAR, GOOTY, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND
1. MD IBRAHIM, SINCE DEAD REP BY LRS R8 TO R12
2. NOOR AHMED, S/O SHAIK FAREED, AGE 60 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 77-386, KALLUR, KUMOOL DISTRICT
3. S K MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O SHAIK FAREED, AGE 48 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 18-198-2-1, KALLUR, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
4. IQBAL BASHA, S/O ABDUL WAHAB, AGE 45 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 41-473-6, KOTHAPETA, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
5. MAQBOOL BASHA, S/O ABDUL WAHAB, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 76-97-35-3, WEAKER SECTION COLONY, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
6. PINJARI ISMAIL, S/O P.KHASIM SAHEB, AGE 24 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 2-20, BC COLONY, REMATA VILLAGE KUMOOL MANDAL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
7. RAMA NAIDU, S/O BAZARANNA, AGE 40 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 76-111-4-LB, BELLARY CHOWRASTHA, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
8. MAHABOOB BASHA, S/O IBRAHIM, AGE 49 YEARS, OCC REAL ESTATE BUSINESS, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
9. S PERVEEN BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 48 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
10. S NASEEMA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 32 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
11. S FATIMA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 28 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT
12. S REHANA BANU, D/O IBRAHIM, AGE 26 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O 11-74, OSMANIA COLLEGE ROAD, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tobegs to submit the Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition against the Docket Orders dt. 10.05.2024 passed in IA.No.93 of 2024 in OS.No.l20 of 2014 on the file of the Honble Court of Judge, IV Additional District AND Sessions Judge Kumool Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VIVEKANANDA VIRUPAKSHA
2.
The Court made the following:
COMMON ORDER:
All these civil revision petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/plaintiff who is represented by her GPA holder, aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Judge, Family Court – cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool in three applications filed by the petitioner/plaintiff in O.S.No.120 of 2014. As such, I feel it appropriate to decide these revision petitions by way of a common order.
2. C.R.P.No.1378 of 2024 is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff challenging the order dated 10.05.2024 passed in I.A.No.103 of 2024 in O.S.No.120 of 2014 on the file of learned Judge, Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool, whereby the Court below dismissed the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Order VII Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‗CPC‘), to receive certain documents as evidence. Along with the said application, the petitioner/plaintiff has filed I.A.No.94 of 2024 (under Section 151 of CPC) and I.A.No.93 of 2024 (under Order XVIII Rule 17 and Section 151 of CPC) in O.S.No.120 of 2014, to reopen the evidence and to recall the petitioner/plaintiff which were also dismissed vide two separate docket orders dated 10.05.2024. Challenging the docket orders passed by the Court below in I.A.No.94 of 2024 and I.A.No.93 of 2024, the petitioner/plaintiff filed C.R.P.No.1967 of 2024 and C.R.P.No.1966 of 2024, respectively.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the revision will hereinafter be referred as plaintiff and defendants, as arrayed before the Trial Court in the suit.
4. Brief facts of the case are as under:
(a) The plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule ABCD house site in Sy.No.91 of Kallur village having purchased from one G. Sharfuddin Khan on 28.07.2011 vide document No.6267/2011 and has been in possession of the same ever since. The plaintiff is the wife of G. Sharfuddin Khan, who is an engineer at Dubai and thus the petitioner resides in Dubai along with her husband and is being represented by her General Power of Attorney.
(b) Originally, the land to an extent of Acs.1.15 cents in Sy.No.91 of Kallur village belongs to one Nukala Subbarayudu who, in the year 1952, sold the same to Sampati Sanjeeva Reddy vide document No.182/1952, having enjoyed the same till 12.07.1966, Sampati Sanjeeva Reddy sold the same to one Smt. Hemalatha vide document No.1981/1966. The said Hemalatha, purchased another land in Sy.No.92/2 and 109/3 of Kallur village and collectively, she laid plots in the aforesaid lands and got it approved vide L.P.No.247/1981. Thereafter, the said Hemalatha sold plots of various extents in Sy.Nos.91, 92/2 and 109/3. Accordingly, the land admeasuring Acs.1.00 cents out of Acs.1.15 cents in Sy.No.91 was sold to one Smt. Lavanya on 22.01.1997 and having enjoyed the possession of the same, Smt. Lavanya, on 30.03.2002 sold the house site to an extent of Acs.0.35 cents in Sy.No.91 to one Katta Rama Chandraiah vide document No.2233/2002. Subsequently, the said property belonging to Katta Ram Chandraiah, shown as ABCD, was purchased by the husband of the plaintiff vide registered sale deed dated 08.04.2004 under document No.3710/2004. Thereafter, the husband of the plaintiff gifted the schedule property in her favour on 28.07.2011.
(c) While so, in the month of September, 2014, the agent of the plaintiff, on receipt of information that the defendants are trying to sell the subject ABCD house site as if it is their property, approached the defendants and submitted all the relevant documents to satisfy them. In spite of the same, as the defendants tried to trespass into the plaint schedule house site, the agent of the plaintiff questioned their right over the said property, upon which, the defendants stated that they purchased the land in Sy.No.91 of Kallur village from their vendor. Subsequently, when the agent of the plaintiff enquired in the regional Sub-Registrar‘s office, he came
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
