Telangana High Court
CRP/4404/2025 of Potanaboyina Gopal Krishna Vs Sri Pulluri Rajeshwar 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: 4404 OF 2o2s Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, praying against the Order dt. 14 07.2025 in
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: 4404 OF 2o2s Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, praying against the Order dt. 14 07.2025 in l A.No.2B4 of 2025 in LA.No.'144 of 2025 in O.S.No.8B of 2024
passed by the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge,Medchal- t\rlalkajgiri District at Medchal Between
1. Potanaboyina Gopal Krishna, S/o. P.Khadar Babu, Aged about 36 years,Occ.
Business, Rlo. 5-2-1 , 4thFloor, Sumitranagar Colony, Kukatpally, Ivledchal- t\tlalkajgiri Dist
2. Dasari Padmaalias Duddu Padma, W/o Late Dasari Veena Swamy, alias Duddu Veera Swamy,Aged about 52 years, Occ. Household,R/o. 1-52, Near Hanuman Temple, DommaraPochampal[y VillageOld Govt.School,Tirumalgiri Airforce Academy, Hyderabad, 3 Dasari Mahesh alias Duddu lvlahesh, S/o Late Dasari Veena Swamy alias Duddu Venna Swamy, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Household,R/o. 1-52, Near Hanuman Temple, DommaraPochampally Village Old Govt.School,Tirumalgiri Airforce Academy, Hyderabad.
4. Smt.Sandhya alias Duddu Sandhya, Wo Dasari Mahesh, alias Duddu ltrlahesh, Aged about 32 years, Occ. Household, R/o. '1-52, Near Hanuman Temple, DommaraPochampally Village Old Govt-School,Tirumalgiri Airforce Academy, Hyderabad.
5. Smt.Gyara Sirisha, Wo. Gyaraa Satyanarayanna, D/o Late Dasari Veera Swamyalias Duddu VeeraSwamy, Aged about 32 years, Occ. House hold, R/o H.No '1-4'l , Harijan Street, Doolapally Village Quthbullapur Mandal, Medchal- Malkaigiri District-50O0 1 4
6. Smt.Dappu Srrlatha, W/o Dappu Vinod D/o Late Dasari Veeraswamy alias Duddu veeraSwamy, Aged About 28 years, Occ. Household,R/o. No.10- 165/1/B,Near PochammaTemple,Venukunta, Chandanagar, RangareddyDist- 500050
7 Smt Chityala Lavanya, Wo Late Chityala Dhanraj, D/o. Late Dasari Veeraswamy alias Duddu Veera Swamy, Aged about 38
Years,Occ. Household, R/o H.No.5-96, Quthbullapur Village and Mandal, Mechal-t\tlalkajgiri District-500055 ( All the petitioners are represented bv their GPA holder P Gopalkrishna) .....rarroNERS/A''ELLANTS
AND
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ; in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou- suspend the operation of the order daled 14.07 .2025 pass 2025 in lA.No.144 of 2025 in O.S. No. 88 of 2024 passed I
Crvil Judge, Medchal- Malkajgiri District at tVledchat pendinq c
Sri Pulluri Rajeshwar Rao, S/o Sri. Pulluri Laxman Rao I qed about 41 years, Occ. Business Sri Pulluri Srinivas Rao, S/o Sri Pulluri Laxman Rao.Aoec :rbout 40 years, Occ Business, Sri Pulluri Dilip Rao, S/o Sri. Pulluri Laxman Rao, Agecl I iout 37 years, Occ Business All are R/o. 4-67l'l , Krishna nagar, Dommara t,, champally vrllage, Dundigal-Gandimaisamma IVlandal, Medchal-tvlalkajgir l) strict.
.....RESPON ] =NT/RESPONDENT
-cumstances stated
may be pleased to
rd in l.A No.284 of
y Additional Senior
sposa I of the CRP
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI A. NITEESH REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI S. AKHILESH REDDY rec-esenting SAI
REDDY RAVINDAR REDDY
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN TTIE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT: HYDERABAD
HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4404 OF 2025
DATE: 06-02-2026
Between:
Mr. Potanaboyina Gopal Krishna & Others
Vs.
Mr. Pulluri Rajcshrvar Rao & Othcrs
.. Respondents
This Courl made the follorving:
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 Reddy Ravindar Reddy, learned counsel lor the respondents.
2. This revision is filed assailing rhe order d,ated 14.0i.2025 in I.A. No.284 of 2025 in I.A. No.l44 of 2024 in O.S. No.88 of 2024 passed by learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal - Malkajgiri District at Medchal.
3. The respondents - plaintiffs have hled the suit in O.S. No.88 of 2024 against the petitioners herein seeking perpetual injunction. Along with the said suit, they have also filed an Interlocutory Petitioners
KI-,J CRP No 4404 o12025 Application under Order - XXXX' Rules - | and 2 of ( IPC' vide l'L' No. 144 of 2024, seeking temporary injunction' tr'ir: order dated l3.O2.2[25,learned trial Court allowed the said I \ ' and granted interim injunction in favour of the respondents - pla r tiffs' [t is on contest. According to the petitioners, they have prelt rred an appeal vide C.M.A.No' l6 of 2025 challenging the said order rtrd the same is pending.
4. The respondents - plaintiffs had filed an appl :ation vlde I A' No.284 of 2025 under Section - i 5 1 of CPC, seeking 1 olice aid' Vide order dated 14.07 '2025, leamed trial Courl all' 'wed the said application and granted poiice aid' directing tht Station House Officer, Dundigal Police Station' to provide suitable I 'olice protection to the respondents herein as and when required for'the respondents herein. Chattenging the said order' the petitioners lled the present revlslon.
5. During the course of hearing' it is brougr to the notice of this Court that the petitioners herein have also filer an Interlocutory Application in O'S' No'88 of 2024' vide I'A' No'lL :0 of 2024 under Order - XXVI, Ruie - 9 of CPC' seeking to aprl rint an Advocate KL.J CRP No.ll01 or 2025 Commissioner to note down the physical features of schedule property, and the same was allowed on 13.02.2025.
6. In the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 in I.A. No.2g4 of 2025 in I.A. No.144 of 2024 in O.S. No.gg of 2024, leamed trial Courr mentioned that notice given to other side through RpAD and WhatsApp, and learned counsel for the petitioners therein submitted that the counsel on record refused to receive the notice and, hence, treated no counter. In fact, the petitioners herein entered appearance in O.S. No.88 of 2024. They have also filed counrer in I.A. No. I44 of 2024 and also filed I.A. No.220 of 2024 seeki4g to appoinr an Advocate Commissioner. They have also filed written statement in the suit. Therefore, Iearned counsel fbr.the respondents - plaintiffs 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 aspecrs. learned trial Court held that notice given ro other side through RpAD and WhatsApp and leamed counsel for the petitioners herein refused to receive the same, hence, treated as no counter, which is factually incorrect. On the said ground, Teamed trial Couft cannot gr.ant police aid by allowing I.A.
KI,.J I RP No 4101 o12025 No.284 of 2025.1t amounts to denial of opportunity t,r the petitioners hercin. Theret<tle, the irnpugned order is not on coll: i leration ol the aloresaid aspects. The impugned order was passed wirl out putting the petitioners on notice and without affording them ar lpportunity of filing counter and hearing. Therefore, on the sa r grounds, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
7. -this Civil Revision Petition is accordingly aside the ordcr dated 14.07.2025 in I.A. No.284 'r No.l44 ol 2024 in O.S. No.88 of 2024 passed by leiLr Senior Civil JLrdge, Medchal - Malkajgiri District ar matter is remarrded back to leamed trial Court, rvitl decide I.A. No.l84 ol 2025 strictly in u".o1d4nge r\ i considering thc guidelines laid down by this Court Sampath v. Shanagonda Akhilar, as expeditiou; prelerably witlrin a period of thirty (30) days from tlt olcopy of this older. ln the circumstances of the cas: no order as to costs. Lllorved setting ' 2025 in LA. ned Additional Medchal. The a direction to h law and also r Shanagonda 1 as possible, date of receipt ;. there shall be C R.l'. No.25l6 o1 2024. dccided on 09.06.2025
) KL,I CRP No 41or ot202i As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any' pending in the revision shall stand closed' s D/- A. H rsdffJYt E8,tT[tE //TRUE COPY/' S CTION OFFICER VM/PSL To' chal Malkajgiri District i qttilt H'uxtzs#'tffm[i's'.uf,Jl::"**" to P U C] )f,, v
i HIGH COURT DATED:06/02/2026
ORDER
CRP.No.4404 of 2025 ALLOWING THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION 1 ::_---:\\-
- c Li i4ra I 1q 202 51 4 l.grt \ o t R i o ,J )- :\ * * b 1/ Gi(