Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRP/610/2020 of MAJETI SRINIVAS MURHY Vs MAJETI RAJENDRA PRASAD on 29 December 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3560] TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 610/2020 Between: 1. MAJETI SRINIVAS MURHY, SON OF
APHC010091352020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 610/2020
Between:
1. MAJETI SRINIVAS MURHY, SON OF LATE SUBRAHMANYAM @ CHITTI
BABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF
DOOR NO.11-832, 7TH LANE, NAGARALU, AMARAVATHI ROAD, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1. MAJETI RAJENDRA PRASAD, SON OF LATE SUBRAHMANYAM @
CHITTI BABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT
OF DOOR NO.3-744, NEAR STATE BANK OF INDIA, GOPURAM
STREET, PUTTAPARTHI, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT (PETITIONER)
2. MAJETI KUTUMBA RAO, SON OF LATE PANAKALU, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 75 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.8-5-120,121, 6TH LANE NEHRU NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT (R1)
3. MAJETI PANAKALU, SON OF LATE MUTYALA RAO, HINDU, AGED
ABOUT 70 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.MIG 518, 3RD
PHASE, C/O NEELICHANDRA PROVISIONAL STORES, SIVALEELA
RESIDENCY, KPHB COLONY, KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD WITH IN THE
JURISDICTION OF JCJ MIYAPUR (R2)
4. MAJETI GOWRI SANKAR PANAKALU, SON OF LATE SUBRAHMANYAM
@ CHITTI BABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, BUSINESS, C/O
ANNAPURNA HOSIERIES, BESIDE OVER BRIDGE, MAIN ROAD, 3RD
LANE, ARUNDELPET, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT (R3)
5. MAJETI SUDHAKAR MOULI, SON OF LATE SUBRAHMANYAM @ CHITTI
BABU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, CIVIL ENGINEER, RESIDENT
OF DOOR NO.1-3-24-19-3, ARAVINDA STREET, NEAR MAYURI
APARTMENTS, VIDYADARA PURAM, VIJAYAWADA TOWN, KRISHNA
DISTRICT (R5)
6. MAJETI PANAKALU, SON OF KUTUMBA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 61
YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.8-5-120,121, 6TH LANE, NEHRU NAGAR, GUNTUR (R6)
7. MAJETI VENKATESWARLU GOVINDU, SON OF KUTUMBA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.8-5- 120,121, 6TH LANE NEHRU NAGAR, GUNTUR (R7)
8. MAJETI PRASAD, SON OF KUTUMBA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 55
YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.8-5-120,121, 6TH LANE
NEHRU NAGAR, GUNTUR (R8)
9. SHAIK KHAMAR, SON OF LATE SHAIK BUDDA SAHE), MUSLIM, AGED
ABOUT 50 YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF 6TH LANE, ANANDAPET, GUNTUR TOVVR, GUNTUR DISTRICT (R9)
10. MOHAMMAD AFZAL, SON OF LATE AHMED, MUSLIM, AGED ABOUT 45
YEARS, BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF 6TH LANE, ANANDAPET, GUNTUR
TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT (R10)
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. ALAPATI ROHINI SRINIVAS MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.
The Court made the following:
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 610/2020
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.
O R D E R:
1. None appeared on behalf of the parties.
2. A report of the Principal District Judge, Guntur, is placed on record.
3. The instant Civil Revision Petition has been preferred against an Order dated 26.07.2019 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Guntur, in T.O.P.No.154 of 2017. By passing the impugned order, learned Principal District Judge, Guntur has transferred a suit vide O.S.No.86 of 2014 pending on the file of learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, and it was withdrawn and transferred to the learned Principal District Judge, Guntur.
4. The report of learned Principal District Judge, Guntur, speaks that both suits vide O.S.No.86 of 2014 and O.S.No.104 of 2019 were clubbed together and a common trial has already been commenced, both parties are appearing before the learned Trial court diligently. This being the existing fact and status of the matter, it appears that though a challenge of the order of Transfer of Suit in O.S.No.86 of 2014 is made before this Court, but the Petitioner is proceeding before the learned Trial Court as party to the suit.
5. Considering the entire aspect, no cause of action exists to decide the illegality and impropriety of the impugned Order dated 26.07.2019 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Guntur. Accordingly, the instant Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
6. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA KS Dated:30-12-2025.
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.610 OF 2020
DATED:30.12.2025.
KS