HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI Civil Revision Petition No.197 of 2024

ORDER

This civil revision petition is filed against the order dated

07.11.2023 in I.A.No.440 of 2022 in O.S.No.21 of 2019 on the file the Principal District Judge’s Court, Rajanna Sircilla.

2. The revision petitioner herein is the plaintiff and the respondents herein are the defendants in the suit in O.S.No.21 of 2019. The suit was filed for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property i.e., agricultural land in Survey No.1560 admeasuring Ac.3.00 guntas situated at Vemulawada Town and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District. Respondents No.2 & 3 submitted that their late father has executed a will deed in their favour in respect of his self- acquired property of the subject agricultural land and then on the basis of the same, some of the suit schedule property has been mortgaged with respondent No.4. When the suit was coming for trial, the petitioner/plaintiff filed I.A.No.440 of 2022 seeking a direction to the Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal to produce the mutation proceedings issued in favour of respondents No.2 & 3 in respect of the suit schedule property. The respondents have objected to the same submitting that initially the petitioner had made an application to the Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal and the Tahsildar, in his reply, has stated that the mutation proceedings are not available in their office, vide letter No.B/888/2020, dated 06.11.2020 and again on 10.11.2020, the petitioner filed another application under Right to Information Act before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Sircilla, and the R.D.O. also gave the same reply vide letter No.E/1986/2020 and therefore, no purpose would be served by giving such a direction. After taking the same into consideration, the trial Court has dismissed the I.A.No.440 of 2022, vide order dated 07.11.2022. Aggrieved by the said orders, the plaintiff approached this Court by filing the present civil revision petition.

3. Heard Sri V. Nitesh, learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner/plaintiff and Sri V.V. Ramana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/defendants. Perused the material placed on record.

4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner reiterated the submissions made in the civil revision petition, while the learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned order of the Court below dated 07.11.2023 in I.A.No.440 of 2022.

5. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material placed on record, this Court finds that the petitioner/plaintiff has already sought information under R.T.I. Act from the R.D.O. and on the basis of the report given by the Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal, the R.D.O. has stated that the mutation proceedings are not available in their office. The proceedings of the Tahsildar are dated 06.11.2020, vide letter No.B5/888/ 2020, and for the very same relief, I.A.No.440 of 2022 in O.S.No.21 of 2019 was filed, therefore, as rightly pointed out by the learned trial Court, no purpose would be served by summoning the Tahsildar, Vemulawada Mandal to produce the said documents, which are admittedly not available in their office records.

6. In such circumstances, the petitioner/plaintiff can take a plea of adverse inference, if she so chooses, against existence of the documents, instead of seeking summoning of the officer. The trial Court can as well draw appropriate inference in the absence of mutation proceedings. Therefore, the civil revision petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this civil revision petition, shall stand closed.

_____________________________ JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 26.03.2024 Isn