Telangana High Court
CRP/5632/2015 of Shaik Fathima Bi, Vs Shaik Jhon Bi, on 31 December 2015
Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Civil Revision Petition No.5632 of 2015 Date: 31.12.2015 Between: Shaik Fathima Bi .. Petitioner and Shaik John Bi .. Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.Kambhampati Ramesh Babu The Court made the following: Order : This Civil Revision Petition
The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Civil Revision Petition No.5632 of 2015 Date: 31.12.2015
Between:Shaik Fathima Bi
..
Petitioner
andShaik John Bi
.. Respondent
Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.Kambhampati Ramesh Babu The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order :
This Civil Revision Petition arises out ofOrder, dated 07-10-2015, in IA.No.1149 of 2015 inOS.No.250 of 2004, on the file of the Court of thelearned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli.I have heard Mr.Kambhampati RameshBabu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, andperused the record.
The respondent filed the above-mentionedsuit for partition against three persons including thepetitioner, who is defendant No.3. The suit wascoming up for the defendants’ evidence from 20-09-2010. As the petitioner failed to file her chief-affidavit, her evidence was closed on 03-11-2010and the case was posted for arguments. However,on an application filed by the petitioner, herevidence was reopened on 15-11-2010. On 31-05-2011, the petitioner has filed her chief-affidavit asDW.1 and the case was adjourned to 11-09-2014for her cross-examination and on the said date, thesuit was dismissed for default. However, the suitwas restored on 15-07-2015. On 03-08-2015, thepetitioner was cross-examined. Though the case was adjourned thereafter from 06-08-2015 to 14-08-2015, the petitioner did not adduce furtherevidence. Hence, the lower Court has closed theevidence on the defendants’ side and posted thecase for arguments. At this stage, the petitionerfiled IA.No.1149 of 2015 to reopen the matter foradducing further evidence.
In the above facts and circumstances of thecase, the lower Court has dismissed the saidapplication by observing that the same was filedwith a view to drag on the suit proceedings.
After carefully considering the facts of thecase and the reasons mentioned in the order underrevision, I do not find any jurisdictional errortherein. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition isdismissed.
As a sequel to dismissal of the Civil RevisionPetition, CRPMP.No.7396 of 2015, filed by thepetitioner for interim relief, is disposed of asinfructuous.
______________________
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J)
Dt: 31[st] December, 2015lur