THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2181 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard Sri C.Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 09.06.2025 in I.A.No.312 of 2025 in O.S.No.2 of 2019 pending on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Karimnagar.

3. Respondent No.1 has filed a suit in O.S.No.2 of 2019 against the petitioners herein and respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein for declaration of title and cancellation of sale deeds. The said suit was dismissed for default. Therefore, respondent No.1 herein had filed an application vide I.A.No.152 of 2024 to restore the said suit to its original position by setting aside the dismissal order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the I Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, and the said application was allowed subject to following conditions:

“(i) That the petitioner/plaintiff be and is hereby is directed to pay costs of Rs.1,000/- to DLSA within 15 days.

(ii) That the petitioner/plaintiff be and is hereby directed to file chief examination affidavits of all his witnesses on whom he intended to rely within 15 days by giving due notice to respondent/defendant counsel.

(iii) That the petitioner/plaintiff be and is hereby specifically informed that he will not be granted any adjournment on any ground and shall co-

operate for disposal of the case at the earliest.

(iv) That the petitioner/plaintiff failing to comply with any of the condition Nos.1 and 2 within 15 days be and is hereby deemed dismissal of the present application.”

4. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent No.1 has placed reliance on chief-examination affidavits of himself, PWs.2 and 3. Thereafter, respondent No.1 has filed I.A.No.312 of 2025 in O.S.No.2 of 2019 under Order XXVI Rule (4) (1) (a) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence of plaintiff as PW.1 and attester to the subject Will i.e., Kota Satyanarayana S/o. Late Venkata Subbaiah as PW.4 by receiving his chief on plantiff’s behalf contending that he is 92 years old and suffering with various medical ailments. He is resident of Guntur and he can’t travel to Karimnagar for the purpose of cross-examination. Even Kota Satyanarayana, attester to the Will is also aged person and also suffering with health issues. Therefore, he has filed the aforesaid application to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence of the plaintiff and Sri Kota Satyanarayana.

5. The said application was opposed by the petitioners herein contending that respondent No.1 can’t seek two prayers in one Interlocutory Application and the same is in violation of Civil Rules of Practice. Respondent No.1/plaintiff did not file chief-examination affidavit of the said Kota Satyanarayana, as PW.4. He sought to receive the chief-examination affidavit of Kota Satyanarayana. In proof of the same, learned counsel for the petitioners filed copy of the order dated 25.06.2025 contending that respondent No.1/plaintiff did not file chief-

examination affidavit of PW.4 in the said suit.

6. Vide Order dated 09.06.2025, learned trial Court allowed the said application observing that petitioners herein/defendants raised formal objection saying that their counsel can’t travel to Guntur for recording the cross- examination of PW.1, chief and cross-examinations of Kota Satyanarayana. Therefore, the said objection is only formal.

7. With the said findings, learned trial Court allowed the said application filed by respondent No.1. Challenging the said order, petitioners filed the present Civil Revision Petition.

8. Sri C.Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that without filing chief-examination affidavit of PW.4 i.e., Kota Satyanarayana before the trial Court, Advocate Commissioner can’t record his cross-examination. Learned trial Court granted the relief which respondent No.1/pl