THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.1784 and 1836 of 2025

COMMON ORDER

These Civil Revision Petitions are filed by the petitioner invoking the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the orders dated 20.03.2025 passed by the learned Agent to the Government, Bhadradri Kothagudem, in I.A.No.521 of 2024 and I.A.No.522 of 2024 in O.S.No.43 of 2021, whereunder the applications filed by the petitioner to receive and mark the documents on her behalf were dismissed.

2. Upon perusal of the record, it reveals that this Court on 13.06.2025, while ordering notice before admission, permitted learned counsel for the petitioner to take out personal notice to respondent and file proof of service. Pursuant to the said order dated 13.06.2025, learned counsel sent personal notice to the respondent, which was returned with the postal endorsement "no such person in the address" and he filed memo on 25.06.2025, vide USR No.60903 of 2025. Subsequently, on 11.07.2025, this Court permitted the learned counsel for the petitioner to take out personal notice to the counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent in O.S.No.43 of 2023 on the file of the learned Agent to Government, Bhadradri Kothagudem, and to file proof of service and granted interim stay and posted to 18.07.2025. The interim order has been extended from time to time. In compliance with the order dated 11.07.2025, learned counsel has sent personal notice to the counsel for the respondent in O.S.No.43 of 2023, and proof of service was filed vide USR No.89913 of 2025 on 26.08.2025 and the notice was served on the counsel for the respondent on 29.08.2025. Recording the said submission and in order to afford one more opportunity, this Court posted the matter to 12.09.2025 and extended the interim order till 30.09.2025. Inspite of service of notice, the respondent has not chosen to enter appearance. Hence, this Court has no option except to proceed with the matter on merits.

3. Heard Sri R.R.Kalyan, learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No.43 of 2021, on the file of the learned Agent to Government, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, against the respondent seeking declaration of title, recovery of possession, and for other reliefs. In the said suit, when the matter was posted for examination of PW-4, the petitioner filed two applications, i.e., I.A.Nos.521 and 522 of 2024, seeking to receive the documents annexed to the application and mark the same as exhibits. He further submitted that when the above said applications are pending, the petitioner also filed I.A.Nos.34 and 35 of 2025 seeking leave under Order VII Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) to file documents and permission to recall PW-1 for the purpose of marking the documents. However, the learned Agent to Government without adjudicating I.A.Nos.34 and 35 of 2025, passed the impugned order dated 20.03.2025 and I.A.Nos.521 and 522 of 2024 and the same is contrary to law.

5. This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. It is not in dispute that the petitioner filed a suit vide O.S.No.43 of 2023, seeking a declaration of title, recovery of possession of the suit schedule property, and for other reliefs. The suit was posted for the evidence of PW.4, during which the petitioner filed two applications, namely I.A.Nos.521 and 524 of 2024, seeking to receive various documents and mark the same on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner has specifically raised the ground in the revision petition that subsequent to filing the above said applications, petitioner also filed applications vide I.A.Nos.34 and 35 of 2025, seeking leave under Order VII Rule 14 of the CPC, and to recall PW.1 for the purpose of marking the said documents on her behalf. The record further discloses that the learned Agent to Government dism