HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.417 & 419 of 2024

COMMON ORDER

Civil Revision Petition Nos.419 and 417 of 2024 are filed

challenging the common order, dated 04.01.2024, passed by the Principal District Judge, Karimnagar in I.A.Nos.1441 and 1442 of 2023 in OS.No.51 of 2014, respectively, whereunder the application filed under Section 151 CPC to reopen the suit for recalling PW-1 for marking certain documents and the application filed under Order XVIII Rule 17 CPC praying to recall P.W-1 were

dismissed.

2. Since the issue involved in both the Civil Revision Petitions is interconnected and the result is interdependent, both the Revision Petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by

common order.

3. The revision petitioner herein is the plaintiff and the respondents herein are the defendants in the suit before the trial

Court.

4. Heard Sri P.Sajan Kumar, learned counsel for the revision petitioner. No representation on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 8, 9, 11 to 15 and 17, despite service of notice. Notice sent to

respondent Nos.2, 4, 7 and 10 returned unserved with endorsement “unclaimed”, hence, notice is deemed sufficient. Notice sent to respondent No.3 returned unserved with endorsement “expired”.

Perused the entire material available on record.

5. The brief factual matrix of the case relevant for adjudication for the present Revision Petitions is that the petitioner filed a suit in OS.No.51 of 2014 for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 03.12.2009 against the respondents. The respondents entered appearance and filed their written statements, issues were framed and trial commenced. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner filed an application vide IA.No.73 of 2019 on 12.12.2019 under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC to receive some documents, viz., certified copy of simple sale deed with true translation, certified copy of Certificate issued by the then Tahsildar, Karimnagar under Section 50-B of AP/Telangana Area Tenancy and Agriculture Act, 1950, certified copies of Faisal patti for the years 1965-66 and 1967-68, certified copy of registered mortgage deed No.1983/1969, dated 19.09.1969, and certified copies of written statement, and the judgment and decree passed in OS.No.127 of 1965. The said application was allowed by the trial Court vide order dated 08.09.2023 with a condition that the petitioner shall get ready with the suit. However, as the petitioner did not take steps, the said application was dismissed for default on

29.09.2023.

5.1. It appears that after completion of plaintiff’s side evidence, when the matter was coming up for cross-examination of DW-3, the petitioner filed the above two applications. The trial Court vide impugned common order dated 04.01.2024 dismissed both the said applications with an observation that though the petitioner earlier filed IA.No.73 of 2019 to receive the documents and the same was allowed, however, he did not take steps and get the documents marked. It was further observed that copy of plaint in OS.No.127 of 1965 was confronted to DW-3 and the same was marked as Ex.B-10 and as DW-3 denied the other documents confronted to him, the same are not marked. It was further observed that as the petitioner failed to comply with the conditional order dated 08.09.2023 passed in IA.No.73 of 2019, the application was dismissed for default on 29.09.2023. Challenging the same, the present Revision Petition is filed.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial Court has erroneously dismissed the application without considering the fact that the documents sought to be placed on record are certified copies. He further submitted that the certified copy of plaint in OS.No.127 of 1965 was marked as Ex.B-10, therefore, no prejudice will be caused to the respondents if the applications are allowed and the certified copies of written statement and judgment and decree passed in OS.No.127 of 1965 and other documents as referred in the appli