THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY

Civil Revision Petition No.2489 of 2025

ORDER :

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioners /

defendants under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 assailing the order dated 08.07.2025 in E.P.No.23 of 2024 in O.S.No.903 of 2005 passed by the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil

Court, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the impugned order’)

2. Heard Mr. V.V. Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioners / defendants, and Mr.Pavan Kashyap (through online), learned counsel representing Mr. M. Kalyana Rama Krishna, for the sole

respondent / plaintiff.

3. The petitioners herein are Judgment Debtors in the above E.P. and defendants in the above suit. The sole respondent herein is the Decree Holder in the above E.P. and plaintiff in the

above suit.

4. Initially the suit O.S.No.903 of 2005 was filed by the respondent / plaintiff seeking for specific performance of an Agreement of Sale dated 17.12.2004 by directing the petitioners / defendants to execute and register the sale deed in respect of

the schedule property; and in the event the aforesaid specific performance cannot be granted, in the alternative to direct the petitioners / defendants to pay Rs.1,25,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of payment, i.e., 17.12.2004 till date of realization.

5. Initially, the Trial Court passed an ex parte decree on 06.06.2006 in O.S.No.903 of 2005 against the petitioners / defendants. Aggrieved by the said ex parte order, the petitioners / defendants preferred an application, viz., I.A.No.42 of 2012 in O.S.No.903 of 2005 seeking for setting aside of the said ex parte order. The Trial Court allowed the said application vide order dated 29.03.2014 in I.A.No.42 of 2012 in O.S.No.903 of 2005. After the suit was restored and the matter was ordered to be decided afresh, the petitioners / defendants filed their written statement and contested the case on merits.

6. On 13.12.2016, the Trial Court again decreed the suit O.S.No.903 of 2005 in favour of the respondent / plaintiff and against the petitioners / defendants by directing them to execute and register the sale deed pursuant to an agreement of sale dated 17.02.2004 by conveying the suit schedule property, viz., House bearing No.1-2-361/47 consisting of one shop, hall, two rooms, W.C. and Bath and open space with a land in total admeasuring approximately 54 Sq.Yds. situated at Phool Bagh, Gaganmahal Road, Domalguda, Hyderabad, within two months from the date of the order.

7. Aggrieved, the petitioners / defendants preferred an appeal viz., A.S.No.57 of 2017 under Order 41 Rule 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 before the X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, at Hyderabad. Along with the said appeal, the petitioners / defendants have also filed an application I.A.No.266 of 2017 in A.S.No.57 of 2017 praying the Trial Court to grant stay of further proceedings pursuant to the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2016 in O.S.No.903 of 2005 passed by the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

8. Vide Docket Order, dated 23.02.2017 in I.A.No.266 of 2017 in A.S.No.57 of 2017, the first Appellate Court granted interim protection to the petitioners / defendants by staying the effect and operation of the judgment and decree. Since then, the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2016 in O.S.No.903 of 2005 passed by the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, was under stay. However, the appeal A.S.No.57 of 2017 in between got dismissed for default of appearance on 24.08.2023 as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners /

defendants.

9. Immediately, the petitioners / defendants filed two applications on 30.10.2023, viz., (a) I.A.No.2317 of 2023, a petition under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1973, praying the Trial Court to condone the delay of (36) days in preferring the application to set aside the order dated 24.08.2023 in A.S.No.57 of 2017 which was dismissed for default; and I.A.No.2318 of 2023, a petition under