IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT: HYDERABAD CORAM:

* HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN + CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2185 OF 2025 % Delivered on: 24-09-2025 Between # Mr. Dayyala Prabhakar .. Petitioner Vs.

$ Mrs. Aggeti Kamalamma & Others .. Respondents ! For Petitioner : Mr. C.A.R. Sheshagiri Rao ^ For Respondents : ---

< Gist : > Head Note : ? Cases Referred :

1. 2024 (2) ALD 840 (TS) 2. 2024 (4) ALD 736 (TS) 3. 2013 (5) ALD 584 (AP)

4. (2008) 10 SCC 97 5. 2007 (5) ALT 215 6. 2006 (1) ALD 607 7. 2005 (4) ALT 119 8. (2005) 4 SCC 315 9. AIR 2022 SC 3848

10. (2018) 14 SCC 1

11. (2021) 4 CTC 539 = SCC OnLine Mad 2514

12. 2020 SCC OnLine SC 562

13. AIR 1941 Cal. 670

14. 2006 SCC 3 100

15. (1974) 2 SCC 393 16. (1977) 4 SCC 467 17. AIR 1986 SC 1912 18. 2003 (5) ALT 403 19. (1990) 4 SCC 147 20. 1989 (2) ALT 653 21. 1998 (6) ALT 399

22. CRP No.2178 of 2025, decided on 04.07.2025.

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2185 OF 2025

ORDER

Heard Mr. C.A.R Sheshagiri Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article - 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the Principal District Judge, Hanumakonda, in O.S.S.R No. 144 of 2025 rejecting the plaint filed by the petitioner.

3. The petitioner herein has filed the above suit for specific performance directing the defendants to execute and register sale deed with delivery of possession in his favour, or in the alternative to pass a decree for the recovery of Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Only) against the defendants towards refund of amount due and damages for breach of contract.

4. The petitioner has filed the said suit contending as follows:

i. He is doing business in Adthi at agricultural Market, Warangal as “Sai Sudha Traders”. One Mogli (dead) close relative of the petitioner used to borrow amounts, for his requirements and that he obtained loans amounting to Rs.4.00 Lakhs, Rs.2.00 Lakhs, Rs.2.00 Lakhs. Rs.4.00 Lakhs, Rs.3.00 Lakhs, Rs.2.00 Lakhs, and Rs.2.00 Lakhs on 01.10.2015, 12.03.2016, 13.06.2016, 28.06.2016, 27.07.2016, 15.10.2016 and 01.03.2017, late Mogli acknowledged his liability by executing promissory notes and acknowledgements, at an interest of 3%

percent month.

ii. Late Mogli promised to pay the total amount on or before

03.09.2019 and further he would pay some amount in cash and cheques and agreed that if he fails to pay the amount, he would execute a G.P.A in favour of the petitioner in respect of 1,000 square yards.

iii. In August 2024, the petitioner, accompanied by his wife, brothers-in-law, and one Mr. A. Satish and Mr. A. Pratap approached Mogli and demanded repayment of the entire sum due, which, inclusive of interest, amounted to Rs.90,44,000/-. Late Mogli, citing financial difficulty, agreed to settle the liability at Rs.75,00,000/-. As he was unable to discharge even the said amount, he consented to execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of a plot admeasuring 847.00 square yards (equivalent to 708.177 square metres) in Survey No.568, Shayampet Jagir, Hanamkonda Mandal and District.

iv. In confirmation of his agreement to execute the said sale deed, Late Mogli had handed over the original sale deed dated 19.06.2009 registered as document No.3794 of 2009 and had promised to execute and register the sale deed in favour of the petitioner within two or three months from August, 2024.

v. On 28.10.2024, Late Mogli died due to heart attack leaving behind the defendant Nos. 1 to 5 as legal heirs. Subsequently, the petitioner has approached the defendants and requested them to execute the sale deed. Initially, they agreed and later they are trying to alienate the property which the petitioner came to know on 30.12.2024. Hence, the Plaintiff has approached the trial Court to seek for the relief of specific performance to execute and register the said sale deed.

5. Initially the Court has returned the Plaint with the following objections on 07.01