Telangana High Court

CRP/4645/2025 of Shriram Finance Limited Vs Sri Gangarapu Mallikarjuna on 6 February 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

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 P.SAM KOSHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:46215 OF 2025 Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the Order

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 P.SAM KOSHY

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:46215 OF 2025

Petition under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia, aggrieved by the Order dated.19.11.2025 passed in l.A.No.BB of 2025 in O.S,No.258 of 2O2'l on the file of the V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

Between:

1. Shriram Finance Limited, a Public Limited Company lncorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, '1956, havang their registered office at 1 23

Angappanaicken Street, Chennai$00001 and a Branch Office at I Floor, RK

Nivas, Opp: Baker's Q, Shivam Road, Nallakunta, Hyderabad - 500044

Represented by Shri. Vallampati Prasad S/o V.N. Murthy, Aged about 58

Years, R/o at Flat No.102, Sarojinidevi Residency, Barkatpura Bus Depot Lane, Barkatpura, Hyderabad-500027 .

2. Shri Thyagarajan, S/o Late Rama Murthy, Aged about 87 Years, Occ:

Business, R/o No.23, Besant Road, Royapettah, Chennai-600018, Represented by his Power of Aftorney Holder, Shri. Vallampati Prasad S/o

V.N.Murthy, Aged about 58 Years, Occ. R/at Flat No. 102, Sarojinidevi Residency, Barkatpura Bus Depot Lane, Barkatpura, Hyderabad-500027 .

...REVISlON PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS

AND

Sri Gangarapu Mallikarjuna, S/o Sri Venkatesh Gupta/ Aged about 44 Yea.s, Hindu, Occ: Business, R/o 8-2684/99/16/41 , Road No.12, Banlara Hills, Hvderabad-500034'

...RESpoNDENT/pETrroNER/DEFENDANT

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying lhat in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay of all further proceedings in O.S No. 258 of 20444-on the file of the V Seinior Civil Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad pending disposal of the marn C.R.P.

Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri. N Srikanth Goud Counsel for the Respondents: --- The Court made the foHowing: ORDER

::

IIT THE HIGH COURT F'OR THE STATE OF T,E LANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM (OSHY

Civil Revision Petition No.4645 of 2r)25

Date of order: o,6.o.2.2o126

BETWEEN:

Shriram Finance Limited,

and another

Petitioners

and

Sri Gangarapu Mallikarjuna,

S/o.Sri Venkatesh Gupta

.. Respondent

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER:

The instant Civil Revision Petition is frled by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assrr ling the Docket Order dated 19.11.2025 in I.A.No.88 of 2025 ir O.S.No.258 ol 202 I passed b1- the V Senior Civil Judge, Cig. Civil Court, ar Hyderabad (for short, the (impugned orderrf.

2. Heard Mr. N. Srikanth Goud, learned c lunsel for the petrtloners

3. The respondent hled the above I.A. before the Trial Court under Order VIII Rule-1A(3) of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 prayrng the Trial Court to receive the documents that are appended to the petition.

4. Vide the impugned order, the Trial Court allowed the above I.A, and received the documents appended to the petition subject to proof, relevancy and admissibility thereof.

5. Aggrieved, the instant Civil Revision Petition has been frled by the petitioners.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners f,rrstly contended that the documents which were sought by the respondent to be received by the Trial Court were electronic documents and they have not been brought on record as is required under Section 658 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and therefore, they cannot be marked as evidence. Secondly, the said documents cannot be taken into account as they are not admissible in evidence; and therefore, prayed for setting aside the order passed by the Trial Court and allo r.r, the Revision.

7. However, perusal of the impugned order would go to show thar rhe Trial court itself had left the question cf admissibility of the documents to be raised at the time of rr:: -rking of the documents as would be clear from the last 1l rrtion of the impugned order passed by the Trial court. a. In view of observation taken by the Trial C<r rrt in the last paragraph of the impugned order and the liberty 'n hich has been given by the Trial Court, the apprehension that .he petitioners have as regards the admissibility of the document i is premature as of now. The petitioners, if they have grievan: : in respect of veracity of the documents which are intended to b: marked by the respondent, like non-availability of the certificatr: as is required under Section 658 of the Indian Evidence Act, rr -e permitted to raise the same at the time when the documents a re taken up for marking. In any case, the Trial Court is direc led to take an appropriate decision as regards the aspect of adn Lissibility of the documents to be received in evidence in accordan:: with lau'.

9. For all the above reasons, this Court, at this juncture, is not inclined to entertain the Civil Revision Petition. 'l re Civil Revision Petition being devoid o[ merit deserves to be al 1 is accordingly dismissed. No costs

10. As a consequence, miscellaneous petitions pendinS, if any, shall stand closed. D SD/- K.AMMAJI PUTY REGISTRAR CTION OFFICER To

1.

3. PrlPS //TRUE COPY// The V Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad One CC to Sri. N Srikanth Goud, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies L At{r.

HIGH COURT DATED: 0610212026

ORDER

CRP.No.4645 of 2025 DISMISSING THE CRP WITHOUT COSTS o <) toB HES t4 ! patct :l I :1r,4 2flt$ i t *

t \ t

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead