APHC010555532024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3240/2024 Between:

1. PUVVADI RAMANAIAH @ BAKKAIAH, S/O. NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT

56 YEARS, CULTIVATION, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P.

2. PUVVADI ADI NARAYANA,, S/O. NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P.

3. .PUVVADI VENKATESWARLU,, S/O. NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P.

4. PUVVADI NAGAIAH,, S/O. NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.

CULTIVATION, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, A.P.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

1. PUVVADI VENKATA NARAYANA, S/O. CHINA VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS. CULTIVATION, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

2. PUVVADI VENKATA RAO, S/O. CHINA VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

3. PUVVADI RAMANAIAH, S/O. CHINA VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

4. PUVVADI RAMBABU, S/O. VENKATA NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE, MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

5. PUVVADI SAI KRISHNA, , S/O. VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O. GARLAPETA VILLAGE MARRIPUDI MANDAL, PRAKASAM 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 to allow the Civil Revision Petition by setting-aside the Order dated 30.09.2024 in I.A. No. 249 of 2023 in O.S. No. 219 of 2022 on the file of the Honble Civil Judge (Junior Division), Podili, Prakasam District and Pass 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 to stay all further proceedings of the suit in O.S. No. 219 of 2022 on the file of the Hon’ble Civil Judge (Junior Division), Podili, Prakasam District in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. G L NAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. K PALLAVI The Court made the following order:

Assailing the correctness and legality of the order dated 30.09.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Podili in Interlocutory Application No.249 of 2023 in Original Suit No.219 of 2022, the present Civil Revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. The facts that led to filing of the present Civil Revision Petition are as follows:

i) The petitioners herein are defendants and respondents herein are plaintiffs in O.S.No.219 of 2022.

ii) The respondents herein, who are plaintiffs, filed O.S No.219 of 2022 seeking permanent injunction. The petitioners, who are defendants, filed I.A.No.249 of 2023, under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC, seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that they had already filed O.S.No.134 of 2021 against the respondents/plaintiffs for declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction. It is further contended that the respondents filed the present suit based on false allegations and that a suit for bare injunction without seeking declaration is not maintainable. It is further contended that the suit is liable to be rejected as it is hit by suppression of pendency of suit in O.S.134 of 2021, hence, the plaint is liable to be rejected at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.

iii) The said application was opposed by the respondents/plaintiffs by filing counter denying the allegations inter alia contending that the application filed is not at the proper stage for invoking Order VII rule 11 CPC, particularly after the filing of the written statement and counter, when the suit is posted for framing