Telangana High Court
CRP/4352/2025 of Potanaboyina Gopal Krishna Vs Sri Pulluri Srinivas Rao on 6 February 2026
COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:4352 AF 2025 Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia, praying against the Order dt 14 07.12025in
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:4352 AF 2025
Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia, praying against the Order dt 14 07.12025in 1.A.No.277 of 2025 in l.A No.143 of 2025 in O.S.No 87 of 2024 \passed by the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal- Malkajgiri Drstrict at Medchal.
Between
1. Potanaboyina Gopal Krishna, S/o. P.Khadar Babu, Aged about' 36 years, Occ. Business , R/o. 5-2-1- 4thFloor, Sumitranagar Colony, Kukatpally,Medchal-Malkajgiri Dist.
2. Dasari Padma alias Duddu Padma, Wo Late Dasari Veena Swamy, alias Duddu Veera Swamy,Aged about 52 years, Occ. Household, R/o. 1-52, Near Hanuman Temple, Dommara Pochampally Village Old Govt.School,Tirumalgiri Airforce Academy, Hyderabad.
3. Dasari Mahesh alias Duddu Mahesh, S/o Late Dasari Veena Swamy, alias Duddu Venna Swamy, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Household, R/o. '1-52, Near Hanuman Temple, Dommara Pochampally Village Old Govt.School,Tirumalgiri Airforce Academy, Hyderabad.
4. Smt.Sandhya alias Duddu Sandhya, Wo Dasari Mahesh, alias Duddu fVlahesh, Aged about 32 years, Occ. Household R/o. l-52, Near Hanuman Temple, Dommara Pochampally Village Old Govt.School,Tirumalgiri Airforce Academy, Hyderabad.
5. Smt.Gyara Sirisha, Wo. Gyaraa Satyanarayanna, D/o Late Dasari Veera Swamy alias Duddu VeeraSwamy, Aged about 32 years, Occ. House hold, R/o H.No.1-41, Harijan Street, Doolapally Village Quthbullapur lt/andal, Medchal- lvlalkajgiri District-50001 4.
6. Smt.Dappu Srilatha, Wo Dappu Vinod D/o Late Dasari Veeraswamy alias Duddu veeraSwamy, Aged About 28 years, Occ. Household, R/o H .No . 10- 16511 I B, Near Pochamma Temple,Venukunta, Chandanagar, Rangareddy Dist- 500050.
7. Smt.Chityala Lavanya, Wo Late Chityala Dhanraj, Dlo. Late DasariVeeraswamy alias Duddu VeeraSwamy, Aged about 38
Years,Occ.Household, R/o H.No.5-96, Quthbullapur Village and lVlandal,Mechal Malkajgiri District-500055 (All the petitioners are represented by their GPA holder P.Gopal krishna)
AND
.....PETITIONERS/APPELLANT
Sri Pulluri Srinivas Rao, S/o Sri.Pulluri Laxman Rao,Aged about 40 years, Occ.
Business, Rlo.4-6711, Krishna nagar,Dommara Pochampally village, Dundigal- Ga nd imaisam r'ra Mand a l, lVedcha l-tValkaj g iri District.
....RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT
:1 0F 2t)25
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circunrstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition. the High Court may be pleased to Suspend the operation of the order dated 14.07.2025 passed in l.A. No 277 of 2025 in l.A No 143 of 2025 in O S No 87 ot 2024 by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Medch:rl-lVlalkajgiri District at lVedchal. pending disposal of the CRP
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI NITEESH A
Counsel for the Respondent: SAI REDDY RAVINDAR REDDY
The Court macle the following: ORDER
/'-r
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT: HYDERABAD
HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
CIVIL REVISTON PETITION N
s2 0F 202s
DATE: 06-02-2026
Between:
Mr. Potanaboyina Gopal Krishna & Others
Vs.
Mr. Pulluri Srinivas Rao
Petitioners
Respondent
This Court made the fbllowing:
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.
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Mr. A. Niteesh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. S. Akhilesh Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. Sai Rbddy Ravindar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This revision is filed assailing the order dated 14.07.2025 in I.A. No.277 of 2025 in I.A. No.l43 of 2024 in o.S. No.87 of 2024 passed by learned Additional Senior civil Judge, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Medchal.
3. The respondent - plaintiff has filed the suit in o.S. No.g7 of 2024 against the petitioners herein seeking perpetual injunction. AJong with the said suit, he has also filed an Interlocutory Application \ \\ / /
ll I] i IIii , I I
KL,J CRP No.4352 of2025 under order - xxxlx, Rules - I and 2 0f cPc,vide I.A. No'143 0f 2024, seel(ing ternporary injunction. Vide order dated 13'02'2025' learned trial Court allowed the said I.A. and granted interim injunction in favour rf the respondent - plaintif,f. It is on contest' According to the petitioners, they have preferred an appeal vidc c-M.A. No'15 of 2025 challenging the said order, and the same is pending'
4. Ihe respondent - plaintiff had filed an application vide l'A' No.277 ol'2025 under Section - l5l of CPC, seeking police aid' Vide order dal.ed 1.4.07.2025, leamed trial Court allowed the said application and granted police aid, directing the Station House Officer, Drundigal Police Station, to provide suitable police protection to the resipondent herein as and when required for the respondent herein. Ohallenging the said order, the petitioners filed the present revlslon.
5. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Courr: that the petitioners herein have atso filed an Interlocutory Applicati<)n in o.S. No.87 of 2024, vide I.A. No.218 of 2024 under order - xxvl, Rule - 9 of cPc, seeking to appoint an Advocate \ \
J KL,J
Commissioner to note down the physical features of schedule property, and the same r.vas allowed on 13.0Z.ZO2S 6- In the impugned order dated t4.07.2025 in I.A. No.277 of 2025 in I.A. No. 143 of 2024in o.S. No.87 of 2024,learned trial courr mentioned that notice given to other side through RPAD and WhatsApp, and learned counsel for the petitioner therein submitted that the counsel on record refused to receive the notice and, hence, treated no counter. [n fact, the petitioners herein entered appearance in o.s. No.87 of 2024. T-hey have also filed counter in t.A. No. 143 of 2024 and also filed I.A. No.2l8 of 2024 seeking to appoint an Advocate Commissioner. They have also filed written statement in the suit. Therefore, learned counsel for the respondent - plaintiff instead of serving notice on learned counsel for the petitioners herein before the trial Court, cannot send the same through RPAD and whatsApp. without considering the said aspects, learned trial Court held that notice given to other side through RpAD and WhatsApp and learned counsel for the petitioners herein refused to receive the same, hence, treated as no counter, which is factually incorrect. on the said ground, Qarned trial court cannot grant police aid by allowing I.A. :r
KL,J CRP No.4352 of2025 No.277 of 2025. [t amounts to denial of opportunity to the petitioners herein. Therefore, the impugned order is not on consideration of the aforesaid €6pects. The impugned order was passed q'ithout putting the petitioners on notice and without affording them an oppofiunity of filing counter and hearing. Therefore, on the said grounds, the impugned order is liable to be set aside'
7. fhis Civil Revision Petition is accordinglv allou'ed setting aside the order dated 14.07.2025 in I.A. No.277 of 2025 in I'A' No.l43 of2024 in o.S. No.87 of 2024 passed by learned Additional Senior ci.uil Judge, Medchal - Malkajgiri District at Medchal. The matter is remanded back to learned trial Court, with a direction to decide I.4.. No.277 of 2025 strictty in accordance with law and also considering the guidelines laid down by this Court in Shanagonda Sampath v. Shanagonda Akhilar, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of copy ol'this order. In the circumstances of the cases, there shall be no order as to costs. '. c.R.P. No.l)536 0f 2024, decided on 09.06.2025 '; il
KL,J CRP No 4352 of2025 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the revision shall stand closed SD'. A'JAYAS ASSISTANT REGISTI //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER REE l"rn" Additionar sglro:s,,"1 {11,s^: rrredchaL.rVlarkaisiri District at rr/ledchar istris,i""r'slufi *J#tti,"^r^r'.EBt'Advocateropucl +.f*o CD CoPies VM/PSL W t I I I I I ; I I I : \ \
r' e t I HIGH COUR'I' DATED:0610212026
ORDER
CRP.No.4352 ot 2025 o ()t tc,'* lHE S ,,r I 1i ''f,l ?i))i + * E ALLOWING T}{E CIVIL REVISION PETITION i I I I I I iI I t : l