SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 39248

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
Gugilla Brahmachary – Appellant
Versus
Gugilla Veerabhadraiah – Respondent
CRP 3870/2025



THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3870 of 2025

ORDER:

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the order dated 19.08.2025 in I.A.No.303 of 2025 in O.S.No.50 of 2007 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad (for short, ‘the trial Court’).

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the Court below committed grave error in not exercising its jurisdiction to allow the petition under Order IX Rule 7 of C.P.C in as much the petition was dismissed not on merits because the Suit was of the year 2007 and the matter was posted for cross-examination of PW.4. The Court below did not have jurisdiction to dismiss the petition under Order IX Rule 7 of C.P.C when the petitioner did not have notice restoration of Suit against him after preliminary decree was passed on 18.08.2008 allotting him 1/5th share in the suit schedule property. Moreover, the Suit for partition is still pending.

3. Learned counsel further submitted that with the dismissal of the petition under Order IX Rule 7 of C.P.C miscarriage of justice has occasioned in as much the petitioner is deprived of his right to participate in the suit particularly when he did not have knowledge of restoration of suit against him after 18.08.2008 when preliminary decree in the above suit was passed granting 1/5th share. The trial Court did not give any finding on any of the pleas of the petitioner, particularly, the plea that he did not have notice of reopening the Suit in the year 2022 and that he came to know about it recently. The petitioner is willing to proceed with the Suit at the present stage and he is not seeking reopening of any proceedings. Hence, seeks to pass appropriate orders.

4. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and this Court without going into the merits and demerits of the case, deems it appropriate to remand the matter back to the trial Court to examine the case of the petitioner afresh and upon such, pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

5. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed __________________________

JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL Date: 31.10.2025 vsu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top