##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO

CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.375 of 2022

DATED THE 22^nd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

Between:

Dr.Khaja Najmuddin Subhani

… Petitioner-plaintiff

And

Shafath Banu and others

... Respondents-defendants

ORDER:

1. This Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition is filed under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the docket order

dated 18.11.2021 passed in I.A.No.286 of 2020 in O.S.No.26 of 2016

by the learned II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar at Jagtial.

2. Petitioner is respondent-plaintiff and respondent Nos.1 to 3 are

the petitioners-defendants in I.A.No.286 of 2020 in O.S.No.26 of

2016.

3. Petitioner-plaintiff has filed a suit in O.S.No.26 of 2016 before

learned II Additional District Judge, Karimnagar at Jagtial against

respondent Nos.1 to 3-defendant Nos.1 to 3 for recovery of

possession and declaration of title of a Tin Shed and open place

attached thereto in Sy.Nos.48 and 49 in an area of Ac.0-08 gts., and

BRMR,J

CRP.No.375 of 2022

2

Ac.0-24 gts., respectively in Municipal door No.1-1-224 in Hajipura

locality within Municipal limits of Korutla proper.

4. Respondent Nos.1 to 3-defendants Nos.1 to 3 filed Vakalath in

the suit on 16.11.2016 and the learned trial Court has forfeited the

rights of filing of written statement of respondents Nos.1 to 3-

defendant Nos.1 to 3 on 12.03.2020.

5.1 Respondent Nos.1 to 3 have filed I.A.No.286 of 2020 under

Order IX Rule 7 of CPC and prayed to set aside the forfeiture of filing

of the written statement order dated 12.03.2020 and accept the

written statement filed by them along with the application.

5.2 Affidavit is sworn by respondent No.3 herein, who deposed on

his behalf and also on behalf of other respondents. It is stated in the

affidavit that suit was posted on 12.03.2020 for filing of written

statement. Due to ill-health, they could not appear before the Court

and his counsel was also absent on the above said date due to

personal work, thereby the Court was pleased to forfeit the filing of

written statement and prayed to set aside the order.

6. Petitioner, who is respondent in I.A.No.286 of 2020 has not

filed counter, thereby the learned trial Court has allowed the

application in I.A.No.286 of 2020 in O.S.No.26 of 2016 on

18.11.2021which is impugned in the CRP.

BRMR,J

CRP.No.375 of 2022

3

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner-respondent-plaintiff submits

that the learned trial Court failed to countenance that Order IX

Rule 7 of CPC cannot be invoked to seek enlargement of statuary

time limit for filing the written statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of

CPC. In fact, I.A.No.286 of 2020 is filed after dismissal of I.A.No.143

of 2020, which was filed under Section 148 of CPC for extension of

time for filing the written statement. The learned trial Court ought

not to have allowed the application and ought not to have extended

its judicial discretion in a casual manner and prayed to set side the

impugned order. In support of his contentions he relied on the

decisions in the cases of i) SCG Contracts India Private Limited v. KS

Chamankar Infrastructure Private Limited and others1 and ii) Oku

Tech Private Limited v. Sangeet Agarwal and others, 2016 SCC OnLine Del 6601

8. Learned counsel for the respondents-petitioners-defendants

submits that the petitioners failed to file counter in I.A.No.286 of

2020 and thereby the application filed by the respondents came to be

allowed. In support of his contentions he has relied on the decisions

in the cases of i) Saleem Bhai and others v. State of Maharashtra and

1 (2019) 12 SCC 210

BRMR,J

CRP.No.375 of 2022

4

others, AIR 2003 SC 759 ii) R.K. Roja v U.S. Rayudu and another, AIR 2016 SC 3282, and

Elamkunnapuzha Panchayath and etc., v. Dinkar and etc.,5

9. Heard learned counsels and perused the material on record.

10. Now the point for consideration is: Whether the docket order

passed by the learned trial Court suffers from any perversity or

illegality, if so, does it requires interf