THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2322 OF 2023

ORDER

Heard learned Counsel for petitioners, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 1^st respondent and perused the record

2. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 28.06.2023 passed in I.A. No.284 of 2023 in O.S. No.1465 of 2012 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri.

3. The revision petitioner is the petitioner in the underlying interlocution application and defendant in the suit.

4. The 1^st respondent herein is the respondent in the interlocutory application and plaintiff in the suit vide O.S. No.1465 of 2012 filed for partition and separate possession.

5. Petitioners herein had filed the underlying interlocutory application before the Court below under Order VIII Rule 1(A) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) to receive the following documents:

i. Municipal sanction plan dated 18/02/2003, ii. Certified copy of gift settlement deed dated 09/01/2003, iii. Certified copy of order in A.S. No.337 of 2012, iv. Certified copy of Chief and cross-examination of N.

Chandrashekhar in O.S. No.1504 of 2008 v. Certified copy of judgment in O.S. No.1504 of 2008

6. Petitioners by the underlying interlocutory application contended that the aforesaid documents are vital and important documents for the purpose of adjudication of the subject suit.

7. The said interlocutory application filed by the petitioners herein was opposed by the 1^st respondent/plaintiff.

8. The Court below by considering the respective contentions urged had dismissed the underlying interlocutory application and aggrieved by the same, the present revision is filed.

9. Petitioners contend that their mother executed gift deed in their favour vide document No.133/2003 dated 09.01.2023 and the petitioners by accepting the gift have taken physical possession of the suit schedule property and demolished the old structure therein and applied to the Municipality for sanction of permission for Court, which was accorded by the concerned Municipality vide file No.G2/95/2003.

10. It is the further case of the petitioners that their mother after executing the gift deed, in collusion with respondent No.1 herein had preferred petition before the Sub-Registrar, Malkajgiri to cancel the gift deed and the Sub-Registrar cancelled the same. The said proceedings of the Sub-Registrar were challenged by filing a suit for declaration numbered as O.S. No.485 of 2003 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy and the same is pending.

11. It is also the further contention of the petitioner that his mother also filed injunction suit against him vide O.S. No.1504 of 2008 which ended in dismissal. Thereafter on an appeal being preferred vide A.S. No.337 of 2012, the said appeal was partly allowed. Thus, the copies of the orders in A.S. No.337 of 2012 and copy of the judgment in O.S. No.1504 of 2008, certified copy of chief and cross-examination of one Sri N. Chandrashekhar in O.S. No.1504 of 2008, certified copy of gift settlement deed dated 09.01.2003 executed in his favour by his late mother and also the Municipal sanction plan dated 18.03.2003 are necessary for adjudication of the suit filed by the respondents herein and as such the Court below ought not to have dismissed the underlying application.

12. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents would submit that in the affidavit filed in support of the interlocutory application by the petitioners herein, no reasons are mentioned as to why the petitioners could not file these documents at an earlier point of time even though the said documents pertain to an earlier period.

13. It is also contended on behalf of the respondents that insofar as the claim of the petitioners of pendency of O.S. No.485 of 2003 is concerned, it was abated on 25.10.2025 and I.A. No.1282 of

2007 filed therein was dismissed on 30.04.2010.

14. It is also contended that the