THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR C.R.P.No.2944 of 2022

O R D E R:

This Civil Revision Petition is preferred being aggrieved by the order, dt.18.10.2022 in IA.No.12 of 2021 in OS.No.460 of 2015 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

3. Petitioner herein is the plaintiff in the subject suit. The suit is filed for declaration of title and recovery of possession in respect of suit schedule property. The respondents herein are the defendants in the said suit.

4. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present revision are that, the petitioner herein claims herself to be the maternal granddaughter of one late B.Radhamma, who had bequeathed her properties in favour of her son-in-law, Sri B.Ram Chandra Rao, and three others by a registered Will Deed; that the petitioner, who is the adopted daughter of late B.Ram Chandra Rao, has filed the subject suit being O.s.No.460 of 2015 against the 1st respondent herein, who claims as having purchased plot No.74 admeasuring 280 sq. yards in survey No.593 part, 596, 597, 598 situated at Father Balaiah Nagar, Alwal, Malkajgiri Mandal, R.R.District, under a registered sale deed dt.07.09.1993; and that the 1^st respondent under the guise of the aforesaid sale deed in respect of plot No.74 in survey No.593 part, had occupied the vacant land in survey No.543(northern side), and constructed a building therein, adjacent to survey No.593 part.

5. It is also the further case of the petitioner that in respect of the properties, which were bequeathed by late B.Radhamma in favour of petitioner’s father late Sri B.Ram Chander Rao, she filed a suit vide O.S.No.87 of 2011, against the 2^nd respondent herein and the legal heirs of her aunts and uncles, in whose favour all the properties of late Smt B.Radhamma have been bequeathed, seeking for partition of schedule properties, which interalia includes the land in survey No.543 to an extent of Acres 3.29 guntas; that as, the aforesaid suit filed by her for partition is pending adjudication, she has filed the underlying application before the Court below under Section 10 of CPC seeking stay of the proceedings in the suit vide OS.No.460 of 2015 filed by her for declaration of title and recovery of possession, till the other suit filed by her vide O.S.No.87 of

2011, seeking for partition, is adjudicated upon.

6. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Court below without considering the underlying interlocutory application filed by her seeking stay of the subject suit in proper perspective had erroneously dismissed the same. Petitioner contends that the subject suit filed by her against respondent No.1 herein is dependent on the outcome of the partition suit filed by her, and thus, the Court below ought to have allowed the underlying interlocutory application.

7. I have taken note of the above submissions made.

8. Though, the primary contention of the petitioner before this Court as well as in the underlying interlocutory application before the trial Court is that since, the suit filed by her for partition of the suit schedule properties therein vide O.S.No.87 of 2011, is to be decided first in order to proceed with the present suit filed by her for declaration of title and recovery of possession against the 1^st respondent herein, and as such, the subject suit is required to be stayed till the adjudication of the earlier suit filed by her, it is to be noted that in the suit filed by the petitioner herein, the main relief sought for is of declaration and recovery of possession against the 1st respondent herein as defendant in the aforesaid suit, while the earlier suit filed by her is for partition of the suit schedule properties from the 2nd respondent herein and others.

9. The petitioner herein having filed a suit vide O.S.No.87 of 2011 seeking partition of the suit schedule properties mentioned therein, which interalia includes the land