THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2239 of 2025

ORDER:

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 20.06.2025, in I.A.No.1002 of 2025 in I.ANo.192 of 2024 in I.A.No.397 of 2023 in O.S.No.42 of 2023, passed by the Hon’ble Senior Civil Judge at Chevella, Ranga Reddy District.

2. Heard Mr. A.P. Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. P.Achutam Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. Vide the impugned order; the Trial Court has dismissed a petition filed by the petitioners herein under Order VIII Rule 8A read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, the ‘CPC’) to receive the documents filed along with the said petition on record and also to decide I.A.No.192 of 2024.

4. The documents sought to be brought on record are as under:

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these documents are pertinent and relevant documents to dispute the contention of the respondents insofar as opposing their prayer for grant of injunction in Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 petition which is pending consideration before the Trial Court. He further submits that these documents are also relevant to show that it is the petitioners who are in possession and that the respondents are not in possession. He further submits that the documents also have proof of the suit schedule land being occupied by the petitioners and they are also cultivating the said land.

6. However, perusal of the records would go to show that the documents at Sl.Nos.1 to 4 are proceedings decided by this High Court pertaining to the respondents and the orders and judgments passed in the said writ petitions. The said documents being public documents, this Court finds no good reason in bringing those documents on record as the writ petitions and the orders passed therein are all public documents which the petitioners would be otherwise also entitled to rely on in the course of their arguments. However, as regards the other documents reflected in Sl.Nos.5 to 14 seem to have some bearing to the dispute involved in the suit, and therefore, this Courts does not find any prejudice that would be caused to the interest of the respondents if those documents are received and marked subject to proving of the same in accordance with the provisions of law. The admissibility and relevance should also be taken note by the Trial Court after receiving the same strictly in accordance with law.

7. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the suit is one which has been filed in the early part of 2023 and it is more than two years that on some pretext or the other the petitioners have been avoiding the arguments on the petition for grant of injunction and the matter now stands fixed on 16.07.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, disputes the said contention and submits that they were always willing to argue the matter; however, it was only because of the refusal by the Trial Court in receiving those documents that they were not in a position to argue the case.

8. Be that as it may. This Court is inclined to allow the petitioners prayer to receive the documents at Sl.Nos.5 to 14 subject to the necessary proof of these documents being shown to the Trial Court and the admissibility and relevance also in respect of the same. It is ordered that the documents listed at Sl.Nos.5 to 14 be received for the purpose of marking, subject to proving the same by the petitioners. However, it is made clear that after receiving those documents, the Trial Court shall ensure that the petition for grant of injunction filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC i