THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.2114 and 1544 of 2025

COMMON ORDER

Heard Sri R. Lakshmi Narsimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. Srinivasa Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the record.

2. C.R.P.No.2114 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff challenging the order dated 09.04.2025 in I.A.No.36 of 2025 in O.S.No.158 of 2012 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, at Karimnagar.

3. Likewise, petitioner/plaintiff filed C.R.P.No.1544 of 2025 challenging the order dated 09.04.2025 in I.A.No.12 of 2025 in O.S.No.158 of 2012 by the very same Court.

4. Petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.158 of 2012 against the respondents/defendants seeking declaration of title; to declare the registered Gift Settlement Deed bearing document No.1941 of 1997, dated 29.03.1997 and sale deed bearing document No.2420 of 2012, dated 19.04.2012 as null and void. In the said Suit, the plaintiff had filed an application under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to appoint Advocate Commissioner and the same was dismissed by the learned trial Court. Therefore, he has filed a revision and this Court disposed of the said revision directing the trial Court to appoint an Advocate Commissioner. In compliance with the said order, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed and he has filed his report. Without considering the objections filed by the petitioner/plaintiff, the learned trial Court accepted the said report. Therefore, the petitioner/plaintiff filed one more Interlocutory Application in Order XXVI Rule 9 of C.P.C to appoint 2^nd Advocate Commissioner and the said application was also dismissed. Petitioner filed a revision before this Court and the same was allowed directing the learned trial Court to appoint 2nd Advocate Commissioner. In compliance with the said order, 2^nd Advocate Commissioner was appointed.

5. In the said suit, the petitioner/plaintiff examined himself as PW.1 and also examined the independent witnesses as PW.2. Thereafter, his evidence was closed. He has filed an Interlocutory Application vide I.A.No.299 of 2023 in O.S.No.158 of 2012 under Section 151 of C.P.C to reopen the said suit for further evidence and the said application was dismissed on 06.06.2023. Challenging the said order, the petitioner herein has filed a revision vide C.R.P.No.2855 of 2023 and vide order dated 14.11.2023, this Court allowed the said C.R.P setting aside the order dated 04.07.2023 in I.A.No.299 of 2023, subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- to the District Legal Services Authority, Karimnagar. This Court also directed the plaintiff to conclude the evidence within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. This Court also directed both the parties to cooperate with the trial Court in disposal of the said suit, since it is of the year 2012.

6. Petitioner had filed another revision vide C.R.P.No.2000 of 2024 stating that instead of posting the matter for further evidence of plaintiff, the trial Court has posted the matter for defendants’ evidence on 12.03.2024. On consideration of the said facts, vide order dated 11.07.2024, this Court disposed of the said revision directing the learned trial Court to permit the petitioner/plaintiff to examine three more witnesses i.e., PWs.3 to 5 first and then record the defendants’ evidence including cross-examination of DW.3. This Court also directed the petitioner/plaintiff to cooperate with the trial Court in disposal of the suit i.e., O.S.No.158 of 2012, in terms of the order dated 14.11.2023 in C.R.P.No.2855 of 2023. This Court also observed that the same is the 4th C.R.P. filed before this Court by the petitioner/plaintiff. Therefore, this Court directed the trial Court to make an endeavor to dispose of the suit in accordance with law by conducting proceedings on day to day basis.

7. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed an Interlocutory Application vide I.A.No.12 of 2025 under Section 151