APHC010120782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI 0jP THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1303 OF 2025 Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the order dated 27.12.2024 passed in I.A.No. 1412 of 2024 in OS.No. 320 of 2016, on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sattenapalli. Between: Mungala Kishore Kumar, S/o. Subramanyam, Aged about 56 R/o. 12-25-89, Kothapet Main Road, Guntur years. ...PETITIONER/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF AND 1. The District Collector, Gollectarate, Guntur. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, RDO, Office, 14th crossroad, Guntur. 3. The Tahsildar, Krosuru Mandal, Krosuru, Sattenapalli. 4. Chilaka Peda Apparao, S/o. Anjaiah, 58 year, R/o. Vipparla village, Atchempeta Mandal, Guntur District. 5. Patibandia Joji, S/o. Jakraiah, Aged about 50 years, R/o. Vipparla village, Atchempeta Mandal, Guntur District. 6. Chadalavada Koti, S/o. Chadalavada Srinivasa Rao @ Srinivas, Aged about 50 years, R/o. Vipparla village, Atchempeta Mandal, Guntur District. ...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 . . stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No. 320 of 2016 on the file of the : i ,• , PripcipattCivil Judge (Junior Division) Sattenapalli. A" 'v Counsel for Petitioner : SRI KANADHI BHATLA SRINIVASA MURTHY, ADVOCATE Counsel for Respondent No.6 : RAMISETTY ANUSHA, ADVOCATE Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 : NONE APPEARED Counsel for Respondent No.5: -- The Court made the following ORDER : APHC010120782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OP ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] W THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1303/2025 Between: 1.MUNGALA KISHORE KUMAR, S/0. SUBRAMANYAM AGED ABOUT ^ 56 YEARS, RO. 12-2-89, KOTHAPET MAIN ROAD, GUNTUR ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTARATE, GUNTUR. 14TH REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RDO, OFFICE, 2.THE CROSSROAD, GUNTUR. 3.THE TAHSILDAR, KROSURU MANUAL, KROSURU, SATTENAPALLI. 4.CHILAKA PEDA APPARAO, S/0. ANJAIAH, 58 YEAR, VIPPARLA VILLAGE, ATCHEMPETA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5.PATIBANDIA JOJI, S/0. JAKRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/0. VIPPARLA VILLAGE, ATCHEMPETA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. R/0. 6 CHADALAVADA KOTI, S/O. CHADALAVADA SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/0. VIPPARLA VILLAGE, SRI NIVAS, ATCHEMPETA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...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 to the above named Petitioner begs to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition having been aggrieved by the Order dated 27-12-2024 2 passed in lA.No. 1412/2024 in OS.No. 320/2016, on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sattenapalli for the following grounds among other lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to stay of all further proceedings in OS.No. 320/2016 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sattenapalli and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KANADHI BHATLA SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.RAMISETTYANUSHA 2. The Court made the following: 3 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1303 of 2025 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition has been filed aggrieved by the order, dated 27.12.2024 in I.A.No.l412 of 2024 in O.S.No.320 of 2016, on the file of the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli ("trial Court" for short). Heard Sri K. Srinivasa Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner and M/s. Ramisetty Anusha, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the nnaterial available on record. 2) The petitioner herein is the plaintiff and the respondents 3) herein are the defendants in the suit. 4) The facts of the case are that the petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their successors not to approve any proposals by the miscreants or . any other person/s infringing the right of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. Pending the said suit, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.1412 of 2024 seeking to permit him to take summons to the Sub-Registrar, Krosuru to produce the registers concerning the sale deeds mentioned in the petition and to produce the original certificate under D.Dis.No. 162196, dated 17.01.1997 issued by the ' Mandal Revenue Officer, Krosuru and give evidence. On hearing both sides counsel, the learned trial Judge dismissed the said petition. Aggrieved thereby; the unsuccessful plaintiff filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff would contend that the defendant Nos.4 to 6 were added as parties as per the orders, dated 07.03.2022 in I.A.No.33 of 2019 and that there is no delay on the part of the petitioner in commencing the trial. He would further contend that the Sub-Registrar, Krosuru after satisfying with certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Krosuru under D.Dis.No.162196, dated 17.01.1997 registered sale documents and the said certificate is with, the Sub-Registrar, Krosuru. Therefore, he prayed to set aside the order, dated 27.12.2024 in I.A.No.l412 of 2024 in O.S.No.320 of 2016. 6) Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.l to 3 would contend that the petitioner have opportunity to apply for the certified copies or Right to Information Act for the registered sale certificate alleged deeds and the to be issued under dated 17.01.1997. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 to 6 would contend that the plaint schedule D.Dis.No.162196, property is a Government land and it is assigned to respondent Nos.4 to 6 and some other persons. The petitioner and his family 5 with each other and created false documents and authorities never issued any 'no members colluded filed the false suit and the revenue objection certificate'. Therefore, they pray to dismiss the present !»■ Civil Revision Petition. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material available on record, P.W.l affidavit is examined and thereafter the 7) that the suit is filed in the year 2016. it appears filed on 22.02.2024, he was cross evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.3 is recorded. After cross examination filed to summon the Sub- of P.W.2 and P.W.3, this petition is Registrar, Krosuru to produce the registered sale deeds and original The trial Court is of the opinion certificate and to give evidence. opportunity to obtain the certified copies of deeds and also the said certificate and he has obtain the said documents by applying under that the petitioner has the registered sale also an opportunity to Right to Information Act, but he did not apply the said documents 1 under Right to Information Act, but he filed this petition which shows that the petitioner filed this petition to dragon the matter. Accordingly, the trial Court has dismissed the petition. 2016 filed by the petitioner/ The suit is of the year of the trial Court that to dragon the matter the 8) plaintiff. The opinion petitioner has filed the present petition appears to be not correct. 6 % Being the plaintiff, he will not dragon the matter. If the Sub- Registrar, Krosuru is summoned to produce the registered sale deeds and original certificate under D.Dis.No.162196, dated 17.01.1997 issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Krosuru to give ’ evidence, it is useful for proper adjudication of the issues involved in the suit by producing, the documents and recording the evidence of Sub-Registrar, Krosuru, no prejudice will be caused to anybody. 9) For the aforesaid reasons, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed by setting aside the order, dated 27.12.2024 passed in I.A.No.1412 of 2024 in O.S.No.320 of 2016 on the file of the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli. As the suit is pertaining to the year 2016, the trial Court shall dispose of the same as early as possible, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall SD/- M.PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR stand closed. // //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli, Guntur District. 2. One CC to Sri Kanadhi Bhatia Srinivasa Murthy, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Ramisetty Anusha, Advocate [OPUC] 4. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi 5. Two CD Copies GPC TAC r i I \ \ \ \ HIGH COURT DATED: 14/08/2025 ORDER CRP NO. 1303 OF 2025 ALLOWING THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION WITHOUT COSTS