SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 26051

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
V.SUJATHA
Konisi Trinadharao – Appellant
Versus
Subuddhi Ramarao – Respondent
CRP 1976/2026



##PAGE1## ##PAGE2##

2

2026V:SA,JP HC:29269

CRP.No.1976 of 2026

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 toAggrieved by the impugned Decree and Order dtd. 19-06-2026

passed in LA. 450/2025 in O.S. No.99/2018, on the file of Junior Civil Judge,

Cheepurapalli, Vizianagaram District,

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

Pleased to Stay all further proceedings in the suit O.S. 99 / 2018, the file of

Junior Civil Judge Court, Cheepurupalli, Vizianagaram district and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. M V RAJA RAAM

2. Dr M V Raja Raam

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. T V SRI DEVI

The Court made the following:

##PAGE3##

3

2026V:SA,JP HC:29269

CRP.No.1976 of 2026

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution

of India by the petitioners/defendants aggrieved by the order passed by the

learned Special Judicial Magistrate of I Class (Mobile) – cum – II Additional

Junior Civil Judge, Vizianagaram, dated 19.06.2026 in I.A.No.450 of 2025 in

O.S.No.99 of 2018, whereby, the Court below dismissed the application filed

by the petitioners/defendants under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil

Procedure (for short ‗CPC‘), for appointing an advocate commissioner to

localize the properties situated in S.No.112-6 at Kotha Gavidi street,

Cheepurupalli village with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor, Cheepurupalli

as well as to note the physical features on the ground.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:

(a) For convenience, the parties will be referred to as they were

arrayed in the suit. The plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 are brothers and the 3rd plaintiff is

the son of the 1st plaintiff. The plaint schedule property, admeasuring Acs.0.76

cents in S.No.112/6 of Cheepurupalli village, is said to have succeeded upon

the plaintiffs from their ancestors and accordingly, revenue authorities have

issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds in their favour.

(b) While the matter stood thus, the defendants, who are a couple,

approached the plaintiffs for purchasing the plaint schedule properties,

however, as the plaintiffs refused to sell the same, the defendants are alleged

##PAGE4##

4

2026V:SA,JP HC:29269

CRP.No.1976 of 2026

to have bore grudge against the plaintiffs and started interfering with the

peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property without

having any right or title over the same. Hence, the plaintiffs filed O.S.No.99 of

2018 against the defendants seeking the following prayer:

―i) For permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents

and servants from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and

enjoyment of the plaint schedule property in any way and also from

trespassing into the plaint schedule property;

ii) For costs of the suit; and

iii) Such other relief or relieves as the Honourable court deems fit and

proper in the circumstances of the case‖

(c) The defendants have contested the suit by filing their written

statement. It is the case of the defendants that the land admeasuring Acs.0.05

cents in S.No.154-10 which is correlated to S.No.112-6 of Kotha Gavidi street

is purchased by father of the 1st defendant under registered sale deed dated

02.01.1975 and the same is also reflected in the Will dated 09.10.2017

executed by his late father. After recording evidence adduced by both the

parties, when the Court below adjourned the matter on several occasions for

arguments, the defendants filed an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of

CPC, with a plea to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to localize the plaint

schedule property and his property situated in S.No.112-6 with the help of

surveyor, which was dismissed by the Court below vide impugned order dated

19.06.2026. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants filed this revision petition.

##PAGE5##

5

2026V:SA,JP HC:29269

CRP.No.1976 of 2026

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top