IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

C.R.P.No.1229 of 2025

05^TH JANUARY, 2026

Between:

Smt. D. Jayaprada.

… Petitioners

AND

Mr. Pasham Bhaskar.

…Respondents

ORDER

Heard Smt. B. Neeraja Reddy, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners.

2. In spite of service of notice, there is no representation

on behalf of the 1^st respondent-plaintiff.

3. Aggrieved by the docket order dated 20.03.2025 passed in O.S.No.475 of 2021 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate at Malkajgiri, this civil revision petition is filed by the

petitioners-defendants 1 and 2.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the 1st respondent- plaintiff has filed O.S.No.475 of 2021 for perpetual injunction. The said suit was coming up for recording of plaintiff’s evidence. After recording the evidence in chief and marking exhibits, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed for recording the cross-examination of PW-1. At this juncture, there was failure on the part of the section to handover the exhibits to the Advocate Commissioner for recording the cross-examination effectively by confronting the exhibits marked on behalf of the 1st respondent-pla