Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRP/830/2026 of PYDI VENKATA RAMANA Vs UPPADA VIJAYA LAKSHMI on 1 April 2026
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026) APHC010127802026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3299] THURSDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 830/2026 Between: 1. PYDI
(RNT,J
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
APHC010127802026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 830/2026
Between:
1. PYDI VENKATA RAMANA, S/O LATE KRISHNA SARMA, AGED
ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O 39-16-36, MADHAVADHARA, INDUSTRIAL
ESTATE, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
2. PYDI GIRIDHAR,, S/O LATE KRISHNA SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 63
YEARS, R/O 39-16-36, MADHAVADHARA, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. UPPADA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, W / O SURYANARAYANA, R/O D. NO.
39-19-89, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
2. SMT PUJARI ANNAPURNAMMA, W/O LATE SURYANAYYA, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
R/O
39-18-93,
MADHAVADHARA,
VISAKHAPATANAM - 530007
3. SMT BHAGAVATHI VIMALA, W/O VISWESWARA PADMNABHA
RAO, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O GREEN GARDEN, PUNJAB
HOTEL, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
4. SMT POTNURI ARUNA, W/O DALINAIDU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O 39-18-102/1, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
5. SMT
BHAGAVATI
CHANDRAMATHI,
W
/
O
LATE
SREE
RAMAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 38-80-132,
(RNT,J
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
HUSSAIN NAGAR, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007 6.
6. SMT PADMAVATHI W/O LATE VENKATA NARASIMHAM, AGED
ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 39-19-52, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
7. SMT GURUGUBELLI DAMAYANTHI, W/O SATYAM, AGED ABOUT
YEARS,
R/O
VASUDEVAPATNAM,
SANTHA
KAVITI,
SRIKAKULAM - 532123
8. SMT SANAPALA PADMAVATHI, W/O VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED, ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O 39-21-32/1, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007
9. SMT GURUGUBELLI VARAHALAKSHMI, W/O SREERAMAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 39-25-34, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM - 5300007
10. SRI KANCHARANA VEDA KUMAR, S/O LATE GOPALADU, AGED
ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 39-26-43/1, RAJEEV NAGAR, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM- 530007
11. SMT BODEPALLI SULOCHANA, . W / O RAJ AGOPALA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O AKKULAPETA, AMADAVALASA, SRIKAKULAM - 532185
12. SRI KANCHARANA VIJAY KUMAR, S/O LATE GOPALUDU, AGED
ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O D. NO. 39-26-43, RAJEEVNAGAR, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530018
13. SMT SANAPALA SOBHA, W/O ESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 42
YEARS,
R/O
TENNETI
NAGAR,
MADHAVADHARA,
VISAKHAPATNAM - 530007 RESPONDENTS / PETITIONERS
PLAINTIFFS
14. SMT PYDI VARAHALAMMA, (DIED)
15. SMT SANAPALA SRIDEVI, W / O STV RAMANA, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O D. NO. 39-16-36, MADHAVADHARA, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, VISAKHAPATNAM.
16. SMT K SUMALATHA, W/O VENKATA RAO, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O
D. NO. 39-16-36, MADHAVADHARA, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
(RNT,J
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
VISAKHAPATNAM.
17. SANAPALA ROHINI, W/O LATE KUMAYATHA, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.
18. SANAPALA SATYA RAO, S/O LATE RAMAYYA, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/ O MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM. 19.
19. SRI POOJARI NARASIMHA MURTHY, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGE NOT
KNOWN,
R/O
D.
NO.
39-18-33,
MADHAVADHARA,
VISAKHAPATNAM. 20.
20. SRI POOJARI JAGADISH, S/O NARASIMHA MURTHY, AGE NOT
KNOWN,
R/O
D.
NO.
39-18-33,
MADHAVADHARA,
VISAKHAPATNAM.
21. SMT CH V J MADHAVI, W/O KISHAN RAO, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O
D. NO. 39-18-33, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.
22. SMT D NALINI, W / O NAGESWARA RAO, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O
D. NO. 39-18-33, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.
23. SANAPALA VARAHALAMMA, W/O LATE APPARAO, AGE NOT
KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM. 24.
24. SMT MOOLA SEETHA DEVI, W/O LAKSHMANA RAO, AGE NOT
KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM. 25.
25. SMT PYDI KAMALA, W/O LATE APPARAO, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O
VISAKHAPATNAM..
26. SMT YENNA KANTHAM, W / O RAMAM, AGE NOT KNOWN, R/O
SRIKAKULAM.
27. SMT BIRLANGI SATYAVATHI, W / O LAKSHMANA RAO, AGE NOT
KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM.
28. SANAPALA VENKATA RAO, S/O ADINARAYANA, AGE NOT
KNOWN, R/ O VISAKHAPATNAM. / 29.
29. SMT KUNNA VARAHALAKSHMI, W/O KONDALA RAO, AGE NOT
KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM.
30. SRI SANAPALA TRINADHA RAO, S / O ADINARAYANA, AGE NOT
(RNT,J
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM. 31.
31. SRI SANAPALA NARAYANA RAO, S / O ADINARAYANA, AGE NOT
KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM.
32. SMT MODALAVALASA DURGA BHAI, W/O VYKUNTA RAO, AGE
NOT KNOWN, R/O VISAKHAPATNAM.
33. M/S ECE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SANATH NAGAR, YERRAGADDA, HYDERABAD.
34. M/S LAKSHMI HYUNDAI, REP. BY ITS MANAGER/ AUTHORIZED
SIGNATORY, BIRLA JUNCTION, VISAKHAPATNAM. 35.
35. M/S BHIRAGACHI FINANCE CO PVT LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PAYYAN VEETIL BHOPALA, S/O K. K. NAMBIAR, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O 153, PARNESREE PALLY KOLKATA. 36.
36. M/S ECE INDUSTRIAL LIMITED, REP. BY ITS VICE PRESIDENT
JAVALA PRASAD BALASARIA, R/O D. NO. 28-A, KASTURBA
GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI.
37. SHEIK JILANI CONSTRUCTIONS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING
PARTNER, SK. JILANI, S/O S. A. SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 56
YEARS, R/O D. NO. 39-9-39/1, TENNETI NAGAR, MURALI NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM.
38. SMT KUTIKUPALA KRISHNA VENI, W / O RAMALINGESWARA
RAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O 39-16-43, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.
39. SRI NAGUPALLI DIVAKAR, S / O LATE RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT
51 YEARS R/O D. NO. 39-8-59/2, MURALINAGAR, SECTOR - 8, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toThe abovenamed Petitioners beg to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition to this Honble Court being aggrieved by the Order dated 22-11-2025 in I.A. No. 788 of 2018 in I.A. No. 112 of 2017 in O.S. No.
534 of 2011 on the file of the Honble Second Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam.
(RNT,J
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay all further proceedings including trial of the suit in O.S. No.
534 of 2011 on the file of the Hon'ble Court of the Second Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam pending disposal of this Civil Revision Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. A PRABHAKAR SARMA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
The Court made the following:
(RNT,J
C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
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 has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the order dated 22.11.2025 passed in I.A. No.788 of 2018 in I.A. No.112 of 2017 in O.S. No.534 of 2011 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam.
2. Heard Sri A. Prabhakar Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners, appearing through virtual mode, and perused the material available on record.
3. The petitioners are defendants Nos.2 and 3 in O.S. No.534 of 2011. The respondents/plaintiffs filed the aforesaid suit seeking partition of the plaint schedule properties, which came to be dismissed for want of prosecution on 30.01.2017. Thereafter, the plaintiffs filed I.A. No.112 of 2017 through their General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder seeking restoration of the suit, which was also dismissed for default on 06.09.2018. Subsequently, I.A. No.788 of 2018 was filed to set aside the order dated 06.09.2018 and to restore I.A. No.112 of 2017, and the same was allowed by the trial Court by order dated 22.11.2025.
4. Challenging the order dated 22.11.2025, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed.
(RNT,J C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though I.A.No.788 of 2018 was filed within time, the cause shown by the respondents/plaintiffs is not sufficient to justify their absence. He submits that the respondents and their GPA holder are close relatives residing in the same place and, therefore, the reasons assigned do not constitute sufficient cause.
6. On consideration of the material on record and the order under challenge, this Court is of the view that the learned trial Court has recorded specific findings with regard to the sufficiency of the cause shown by the plaintiffs for their absence when I.A. No.112 of 2017 was dismissed for default. The trial Court, upon appreciation of the pleadings and material, has taken note of the fact that the GPA holder, who was prosecuting the matter on behalf of the plaintiffs, was suffering from cancer for a considerable period and ultimately died on 23.07.2019. The said circumstance has been duly considered while arriving at the conclusion that the plaintiffs were prevented by sufficient cause.
7. It is well settled that matters dismissed for default ought to be restored when sufficient cause is shown, so as to advance substantial justice. The trial Court has exercised its discretion judiciously in taking a lenient view in the matter, particularly when the lis pertains to a suit for partition, wherein rights of parties are to be adjudicated on merits.
8. I find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.
(RNT,J C.R.P.No.830 of 2026)
9. No case for interference is made out in the exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
10. The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.
No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J
Date : 02.04.2026.
RPD.
(RNT,J
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
(DISMISSED)
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 830 OF 2026
Date : 02.04.2026
RPD.