APHC010705482022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2795/2022 Between: 1. KALLURI PADMA, W/O VENKATAA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O 25-14-52, 9TH LANE SRINIVASARAO THOTA, GUNTUR. ...PETITIONER AND 1. K RANGACHARI RAVICHANDRAN, S/O. SRINIVASA VARADA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS. 2. K K VARADACHARI, S/O SRINIVASA VARADA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS. 3. K RAJAGOPAL, S/O SRINIVASA VARADA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS. 4. K K VEDAVALLI AMMAL, W/O. LATE SRINIVASA VARDA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR AGED ABOUT 96 YEARS. 5. S VASANTHA, D/O. LATE SRINIVASA VARDA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS. 6. R RADHA, D/O. LATE SRINIVASA VARDA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS. 7. SRI CHANDRA SRINIVASAN, D/O. LATE SRINIVASA VARDA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS. 8. K MYTHILI, D/O. LATE SRINIVASA VARADA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS. 9. K SAROJA, D/O. LATE SRINIVASA VARADA RAJASWAMY AIYYANGAR, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 1 AND 4 TO 9 ARE REPRESENTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT WHO IS THEIR G P A AGENT AND R/O DONKA ROAD, ARUNDELPET, GUNTUR-2 AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT IS R/O VELLACHERI, MADRASS -42. 10. APPISETTY VANKAIAH DIED, S/O SAMBAYYA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 11. NALAPARTHI NALABIRUDU RAMULU DIED, , S/O. SAMBAYYA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 12. KONETI ADEMMA, W/O VENKAYAA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAO PETA, GUNTUR. 13. KONETI RAMAKOTAYYADIED, S/O. ROYAL AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 2 14. KOLA SAYAMMA DIED, W/O. GURUVAYYA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 15. APPIDEETY SAMBAYYA DIED, S/O. VENKAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 16. KOLA KRISHNA MURTHY DIED, S/O. PEDA KOTAIAH AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 17. NALAPARTHI NALABIRUDHU MUTHAYYA DIED, S/O. YELLAYYA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 18. KONETI LAKSHMIDEVAMMA, , W/O. RAYALA AGED ABOUT 87 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 19. KONETI LAKSHMIDEVAMMA, W/O. KONETI RAMAKOTAYYA AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 20. KONETI PEDERAYAL, S/O. KONETI RAMAKOTAYYA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 21. KONETI SANKAR SHANKAR RAO, S/O LAKSHMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 22. KONETI SEENU, S/O. LAKSHMAIH AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 23. APPISEETY RANGA, , S/O. SAMBAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 24. APPISETTY SATYANARAYANA, S/O. SAMBIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 25. APPISETTY SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. SAMBAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 26. MARISSETTI KOTAIAH, S/O. VENKAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 27. VADLAMUDI RAMANA, D/O NALAPARTHI @ NALABIRUDU RAMULU AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 28. KAMISETTI SUBAYAMMA, W/O BABU, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. 29. NALAPARTHI SAYAMMA, D/O YELLAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDENT OF SRINIVASARAOPETA, GUNTUR. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased tobegs to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition having been aggrieved by the OrderOrder dated 04-11-2022 passed in CFR No.8877/2022 in Unnumbered claim petition in E.P. No. 85 of 2003, on the file Court of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge at Guntur for 3 IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition 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 pleased to set aside the order dt. 04-11-2022 passed in CFR 8877/2022 in Unnumbered claim petition in EP 85 of 2003, on the file of the Court of IV Addl. Senior Civil Judge at Guntur IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition 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 May be pleased to vacate the interim orders granted by this Hon’ble Court dated 03.01.2023 in CRP.No.2795 of 2022 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PILLIX LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ARUN SHOWRI G The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVION PETITION No.2795 OF 2022 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 04.11.2022, whereby the learned IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, rejected the claim petition filed by the petitioner at the stage of numbering as not maintainable under Section 47 of the CPC. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of property at measuring 80.5 square yards of land together with an RCC building. It is submitted that the title of the petitioner over the said property can be traced to the year 1942 and the property has been passed on from the year 1942 onwards till the year 2007, whereby a registered gift deed was executed in favour of Kalluri Ademma. The petitioner being the only daughter of Kalluri Ademma is in possession and enjoyment of the said property. It is submitted that the petitioner is a third party to OS.No.262 of 1987. The suit schedule property is different and distinct from the claim petitioner's property. It is submitted that the learned Judge while rejecting the application filed by the petitioner had observed at para 8 of the order that the petition property is RCC House and the EP schedule property is to be set aside. 3. He also submitted that under the guise of executing the decree passed in OS No. 262 of 1987, the petitioner's property is also likely to be taken over and the house of the petitioner would be demolished. It is submitted that the petitioner has substantial rights over the property and 5 under the guise of executing a decree of a property which is different and distinct; the petitioner cannot be rendered homeless without following the due process of law. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the application filed by the petitioner under Section 47 CPC was not maintainable and was rightly rejected by the trial Court. It is also submitted that under mere apprehension the petitioner has approached the trial Court and is trying to stall the execution proceedings. It is submitted that the petitioner cannot maintain the claim application under Section 47 of CPC, as the provision of law is clear with regard to the parties invoking the jurisdiction of Court under Section 47 of CPC. It is also submitted that on apprehensions the petition cannot be entertained and as such seeks for dismissing the Civil Revision Petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the material on record. 6. The Executing Court shall take the assistance of the concerned Tahsildar, along with the relevant revenue authorities concerned for conducting a survey of the property and determine whether the petitioner's property form part and parcel of the E.P. schedule property. The survey to delineate the E.P. schedule property is to be undertaken to rule out the possibility of demolishing and taking over the property claimed by the petitioner. If the petitioner's property is found to be different and distinct, the same shall be protected by an order of the 6 Executing Court. It is left open to the petitioner to work out his remedy under the CPC if his property forms part and parcel of the EP schedule property. At any rate the survey of the E.P schedule property be undertaken with the assistance of the Mandal Surveyor and other revenue and municipal authorities. The petitioner may file an application seeking conduct of survey. The learned IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur to issue a regular E.A., number to the petition and adjudicate the same after receipt of the survey report. 7. With these observations, Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 20.04.2026 KGM 7 118 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CIVIL REVION PETITION No.2795 OF 2022 Dated 20.04.2026 KGM