CRP/3542/2025 of Meghavath Sakru (DIED) Vs Vaddi Yellaiah (DIED) on 18 September 2026

134871 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEI\4BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3542 OF 2025 Petition under Arlicle 227 of the Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the Order passed in l.A. No 46412022 filed in O S No '1042l2007,on the file of the court of the V Additional District Judge Ranga Reddy District now at Xll Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at lbrahimpattanam. Between: '1 . [Veghavath Sakru (Died)

2. Meghavath Laxman, (Died)

3. Irrleghavath Poolya, (Died)

4. ltrleghavath Jethya, (Died)

5. tvleghavath Jayram, (Died)

6. A/eghavath Lakhiram, S/o Late. Devra, Hindu aged 43 years, Occ. Agriculture.

7. lt/eghavath Bhadram, (Died)

8. IVleghavath Dev Singh, S/o ltlleghavath Ramulu, Hindu aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, Petitioner No.6 and 8 are residents of N.D. Thanda Maheshwaram Village Ranga Reddy District. ..Civil Revision Petitioners/Plaintiffs AND 1 Vaddi Yellaiah (DIED), (Died)

2. Vangoori Narasimha, S/o Ramulu, Hindu aged 47 yearc, Occ Agriculture,

3. Vangoori Kisthaiah, S/o Balaiah, Hindu aged 69 years, Occ. Agriculture.

4. Vangoori Yadaiah, S/o Balaliah, Hindu aged 64 years, Occ. Agriculture,

5. Vangoori Mallaiah, S/o Balaiah, Hindu aged 64 years, Occ Agriculture,

6. Lambadi ltrleghavath Tuldya, S/o Bojya, Hindu aged 79 years, Occ

7 I\/ Sudhakar Goud, S/o Late. Kumara Goud, Hindu aged 50 years. Occ Agriculture, All are residents of l\,4aheshwaram Village Ranga Reddy District.

8 NRI Golden City. Office- Flat No 102. TNR Varshnavi Apartments, Red Hrlls, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad Represented by its partner Sri G.peddi Reddy S/o Venkat Reddy Hindu aged 44 yearc, Occ Business, Resident of H.No. 12 2-709|C1214 Mehdipatnam, Padmanabha Nagar, t-ryderabad -p lN-50002 8.

9. M.Laxmi Narayana. S/o [\,4.Narasimha. Hindu aged about 50 years, Occ.

10.1/l.Ramr:sh. S/o /\,4.Narasimha, Hjndu aged about 48 years, Occ. Agriculture, 1 l.ltrl.Suresh S/o lr,4 Narasimha, Hrndu aged about 45 years, Occ. Agriculture

12. M Venuqopal S/o lrrl.Narasimha, Hindu aged about 42 years, Occ. Agriculture,

13. lt/.Veerappa S/o M.Narasimha, Hindu aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculture, 14 I\4 Shiva Shanker, S/o lVLNarasimha, Hindu aged abolrt 37 years, Occ. AgricultLrre, Responclents 9 to 14 are residents of Laxminarasimha Gardens, Banjara Gadda Thanda Pulimamidi Village. Kandukur l\rlandal. Ran,la Reddy District. ... Res po nde nts/Defenda nts l.A. NO: 1 OF 2025 Petitron 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 to direct the contesting respondents not to alienate either in whole or in part in favor of any third party or change the nature of the land pending disposal of the above civil Revision Petition before this courl seeking expeditious disposal of application made rn LA.464l 2022 in o S No 1042 t2o07 on the frte of XV Additional District and sessions Judge court Ranga Reddy District, at lbrahimpattanam, for restoration of main suit and other I A.s filed tbr bringing legal heirs of the parties on record. Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri. Surendra Desai Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 9,10 & 11 : Sri. V. Srihari The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD.

* *:& THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3542 of 2025 (CNR No.HBHC0105837 1202s) Date: 18-09-2026 Between: Meghavath Sakru and 7 others. ...Petitioners. AND Vaddi Yellaiah(Died) and 13 others. ...Respondents. @B: Heard Sri Surendra Desai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.Srihari, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.g, 10 & 11.

2. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed against the inordinate delay in passing orders in I.A.No.464 of 2022 in O.S.No.1042 of 2007, pending on the file of the learned V Additional District ludge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners herein are the plaintiffs in the suit in O.S.No.1042 of 2007 filed for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. The said suit was posted for trial on 30.11.2017. On the same day, due to non-filing of the chief examination affidavit of PW.1 and non-payment of costs of Rs.100/- imposed by the Trial Court, the suit came to be dismissed. Subsequently, plaintiff Nos.1 to 7 died and the plaintiff No.8 alone survived. However, he fell ill with jaundice and therefore, he could not

CRP No 35.t2 ot 2025 contact his counsel. Consequently, the failure to file the petition to set aside the dismissal order along with the chief examination affidavit was neither willful nor wanton. Therefore, he filed I.A,No.464 of 2022 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking to condone the delay of 1856 days in filing the petition to set aside the dismissal order. The respondents filed their counter in the said I.A. in the month of October, 2023. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the application was filed in the year 2022 and the counter-affidavit was flled in the year 2023, the learned Trial Court has not disposed of the subject I.A., till date. Hence, this CRP.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the only relief sought in the present Revision Petition is a direction to the learned V Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, for expeditious disposal of I.A.No.464 ot 2022 in O.S.No.1042 of 2007, which is pending adjudication.

5. Learned counsel further contended that on account of the pendency of the said application, the third parties are attempting to create rights over the suit schedule property and therefore, expresses urgency in the matter.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that appropriate time frame may be fixed for disposal of the said application, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties. 7 . Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the learned Trial Court is directed to consider and GPK,J CRP No.3542 of 2025 dispose of I.A.No.464 of 2022 in O.S.No.1042 of 2007, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one (01) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after providing due opportunity of hearing to both the pafties and in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The V Additional District Judge Ranga Reddy District now at Xll Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at lbrahrmpattanam

2. One CC to Sri. Surendra Desai Advocate [OPUC]

3. One CC to Sri V. Srihari Advocate tOPUCI

4. Two CD Copies DL/GNK

G To, Sr(.

HIGH COURT DATED: 1810912026 \:\E :iTAIE o r

ORDER

2tstPx6 CRP.No.3542 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION r) ,,. v 'i.'. o \i' T 4: .t >q\qv$,