HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
K. LAKSHMAN, J
Smt Zareena Tabassum – Appellant
Versus
Banka Purushotham – Respondent
COMMON ORDER
The lis involved in these civil revision petitions and the parties are one and the same. Therefore, the same were heard together and decided by way of this common order:-
2. Heard Mr. Mohd. Afzal Pasha, learned counsel representing Sri Mohd. Imtiaz Uddin Siddique, learned counsel for the petitioner in both the revisions and Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned Senior counsel, representing Sri N.Janardhan Reddy, learned counsel for the 1st respondent/plaintiff in CRP No.3745 of 2024.
3. 1st respondent/plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration of title and perpetual injunction against the petitioner/Respondent Nos.2 to 32 herein. The petitioner herein/defendant No.4 was set ex parte on 29.07.2013. She has filed I.A.No.1408 of 2023 under Order IX Rule 7 read with 151 of CPC to set aside the ex parte decree dated 29.07.2013. Vide order dated 02.01.2024, learned trial Court referring to the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Sangram Singh v.
Election Tribunal, [1995 AIR 425], in paragraph No.11, made certain observations and allowed the application setting aside the ex parte order dated
29.07.2013.
4. The petitioner had filed a written statement along with said I.A.No.1408 of 20
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.