SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 59953

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
Bairi Chaithanya Swamy – Appellant
Versus
Bairi Krishnaiah – Respondent
CRP 203/2021



IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA DATE: 16.12.2025 CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.203 OF 2021 Between:

Bairi Chaithanya Swamy. …Petitioner And Bairi Krishnaiah and others. …Respondents.

O R D E R

This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order, dated 19.01.2018, in I.A.No.510 of 2017 in O.S.No.183 of 1986 passed by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ibrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District, whereby respondent No.1 herein/plaintiff filed an application under Order XXVI Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to get it measured and divide the suit schedule property into three equal shares under the scheme of partition with the assistance of Mandal Surveyor of Ibrahimpatnam, accordingly, the learned trial Court through the impugned order appointed Advocate Commissioner and directed the office to prepare warrant and handover the same to the Advocate Commissioner.

2. Heard Sri T.Venkat Raju Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.Venkateshwarlu, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court without hearing the petitioner herein/respondent No.5 passed an ex parte impugned order and hence, he prays this Court to set aside the impugned order and the matter may be remanded back to the learned trial Court for fresh disposal, in accordance with law.

4. As seen from the record, the learned trial Court passed the impugned order without hearing the petitioner herein. To give one more opportunity to the petitioner to establish his case before the learned trial Court, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, deems it appropriate to dispose of Civil Revision Petition with the following direction.

5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order, dated 19.01.2018 in I.A.No.510 of 2017 in O.S.No.183 of 1986 passed by the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ibrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District, and the matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court for fresh disposal, after issuing notice and after giving opportunity of hearing both parties. Further, both parties shall cooperate for disposal of the case. It is needless to observe that the learned trial Court is directed to dispose of I.A.No.510 of 2017 in O.S.No.183 of 1986 as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Date: 16.12.2025 YVL

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top