APHC010175602025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

PRESENT:THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 909/2025 Between:

1. M URUKONDA SAROJINI, W/O LATE GARATAIAH AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O NAYUDUVARI PALEM, KARAMCHEDU MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT.

2. N AYUDU ANJAMMA, W/O HARIBABU AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O NAYUDUVARI PALEM KARAMCHEDU MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. D ANDA VENKATESWARLU, S/O SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O THIMIRTHAPADU VILLAGE, KARAMCHEDU MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT

2. M URUKONDA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O LATE GARATAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O MURUKONDAVARIVEEDHI INKOLLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATIA 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 tomay be pleased to allow this Civil Revision Petition by setting aside the order of the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge at Parchur, dated 20-02-2025 in LA No. 53 of 2025 in O.S No. 3 of 2019 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at parchur and to 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 may be pleased stay the operation of the decree and order dated 20-02-2025 passed in I.A No. 53 of 2025 in O.S No. 3 of 2019 pending disposal of the main Civil Revision Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 extend the interim orders dated: 04-07-2025 granted in lA No. 01 of 2025 which was lapsed on 12.12.2025 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. GHANTA SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. S GOPAL RAO The Court made the following:

RESERVED ON 18.02.2026 PRONOUNCED ON 09.03.2026 UPLOADED ON 09.03.2026

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the legality and correctness of the order dated 20.02.2025 passed in I.A.No.53 of 2025 in O.s.No.3 of 2019 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Parchur.

2. The Revision Petitioners are the respondents 1 and 2 /plaintiffs, while respondent no.1 is the petitioner/third party and respondent no.2 is respondent no.3/defendant in I.A.No.53 of 2025 in O.S.No.3 of 2019 on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Parchur.

3. The facts that led to filing of this Civil Revision Petition, in brief, are that:

(i) In a suit filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs for partition against the respondent no.2/defendant vide O.S.No.3 of 2019, the petitioner, who was third party to the suit, filed petition under Order-1, Rule-10 and Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure to implead him as defendant no.2 in the main suit contending that he purchased one of the items of the partition suit from Garataiah (husband of plaintiff no.1, father of plaintiff no.2 and defendant) and defendant under an agreement of sale dated 05.11.2017 and out of the said agreement of sale, he paid Rs.14,00,000/- out of the total consideration of Rs.15,00,000/-. It is further stated that the said Garataiah died intestate on 28.12.2017 and as the plaintiffs 1 and 2 and defendant, who are his Legal heirs, did not come forward to execute sale deed he filed the suit vide O.S.No.12 of 2015 for specific performance. Therefore, he is the proper and necessary party to the suit for partition.

(ii) The plaintiffs 1 and 2 filed counter and the same was adopted by the defendant, contending that the agreement of sale is forged and fabricated one and hence prayed to dismiss the petition.

(iii) The learned trial Judge upon hearing the counsel, allowed the petition, holding that the truth or otherwise of the agreement of sale can be gone into in the main suit and in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and effective adjudication of the partition suit, presence of the pe