THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2178 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard Sri N.Laxman, learned counsel for petitioners.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 03.04.2025 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge,

Karimnagar, in C.F.No.2551 of 2024.

3. Petitioners herein filed the aforesaid suit in O.S.(C.F.)No.2551 of 2024 against respondent to declare the registered sale deed bearing document No.10123 of 2019, dated 03.09.2019 executed by Sri Sardar Puran Singh and Surender Kaur in favour of Sardar Haricharan Singh as illegal,

null and void, it is not binding on the petitioners - plaintiffs.

4. Vide Order dated 03.04.2025, learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, rejected the plaint. Challenging the said order, petitioners filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

5. In the plaint itself, petitioners herein have specifically contended that they have right over the suit schedule property. Respondent - defendant is distant relative of late Sri S.Amar Singh, who is the original owner of the property. Late Sri S.Amar Singh is the great great grandfather of petitioners 2 to 4. Therefore, respondent herein had obtained the aforesaid registered sale deed bearing document No.10123 of 2019 dated 03.09.2019. Petitioners sought to declare the said document as null and void. They have also further contended that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 filed a suit in O.S.No.197 of 2013 against respondent and 9 others seeking partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The said suit was dismissed on 03.12.2024 by the learned Principal District Judge, Karminagar. Petitioners 2 and 3 are taking steps to prefer an appeal challenging the said decree and judgment.

6. It is also further contended by the petitioners herein that respondent herein filed O.S.No.9 of 2005 against the said Sardar Puran Singh and his father, namely, Sardar Danna Singh and another for specific performance of contract of sale, dated 28.04.2004 in respect of the very same property. The said suit was decreed on 15.04.2008. Feeling aggrieved by the same, Sardar Puran Singh had preferred an appeal in A.S.No.684 of 2008. The said appeal was partly allowed. Thereafter, respondent - defendant filed Execution Petition vide E.P.No.2 of 2014 and the same is pending. In the said execution petition, plaintiff No.4 received summons in March, 2024. Therefore, petitioners came to know about the said registered sale deed bearing document No.10123 of 2019, dated 03.09.2019. Thereafter, they have filed the aforesaid suit in O.S. (C.F.) No.2551 of 2024 to declare the aforesaid sale deed as null and void.

7. Vide order dated 03.04.2025, learned trial Court rejected the said plaint holding that petitioners/plaintiffs are claiming right over the suit schedule property through Sardar Puran Singh, who has already executed an agreement of sale dated 28.04.2004 in favour of the defendant, the said agreement of sale was confirmed by the trial Court in O.S.No.9 of 2005 and decree in the said suit was upheld by Appellate Court vide A.S.No.684 of 2008. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 – plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 started second round of litigation by filing suit vide O.S.No.197 of 2013 which was dismissed on 03.12.2024. Respondent herein is defendant No.10 in O.S.No.197 of 2013. Therefore, without seeking relief of binding nature of document i.e., registered sale deed bearing document No.10123 of 2019, dated 03.09.2019 in O.S.No.197 of 2013, without seeking leave of the Court under Order II Rule 2 of C.P.C. to raise the defence of the binding nature of the document in subsequent suit i.e., O.S.No.197 of 2013 which was dismissed, petitioners cannot file the present suit.

8. Thus, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, pleadings, documents and plaint, learned trial Court rejected the plaint opining that the present plaint is clearly barred by Order II Rule 2 of C.P.C. as we