APHC010120762025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1310/2025 Between: 1. MUNGALA RAVINDRANADH SAI, S/O. SUBRAMANYAM AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O. 12-25-89, KOTHAPET, MAIN ROAD, GUNTUR ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTARATE, GUNTUR. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RDO, OFFICE, 14TH CROSSROAD, GUNTUR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KROSURU MANDAL, KROSURU, SATTENAPALLI. 4. CHADALAVADA KOTI CHADALAVADA SRINIVASA RAO SRINIVAS, S/O. RADHAIAH, 32 YEARS, R/O. VIPPARLA VILLAGE ATCHEMPETA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. CHADALAVADA RADHAIAH, S/O. KOTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/O. VIPPARLA VILLAGE, 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 2 Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition having been aggrieved by the Order dated 27-12-2024 passed in lA.No. 1414/2024 in OS.No. 322/2016, on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sattenapalli for the following grounds among other IA 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 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KANADHI BHATLA SRINIVASA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAMISETTY ANUSHA 2. The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1310 of 2025 ORDER:- The Civil Revision Petition has been filed aggrieved by the order dated 27.12.2024 passed in I.A.No.1414/2024 in O.S.No.322 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli and consequently, prayed to set-aside the impugned order. 2) Heard Sri. K. Srinivasa Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner. M/s. Ramisetty Anusha, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record. 3) The petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants in the suit. 4) The petitioner herein has filed a suit in O.S.No.322 of 2016 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli, seeking 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 properties. Pending suit, the petitioner has filed I.A.No.1414/2024 under Order 16 Rule 1 Civil Procedure Code for issuance of summons to the Sub- Registrar, Krosuru, Sattenapalli, to produce the registers pertaining to the registered sale deeds relating to the suit schedule properties and also to produce the original certificate under D.Dis.No.162196, dated 17.01.1997 4 issued by him. On hearing both sides, the trial court dismissed the said Interlocutory Application. 5) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned trial court erroneously dismissed the interlocutory application filed by the petitioner. The learned trial court failed to observe that the defendants 4 to 5 were impleaded as parties vide order dated 16.03.2022 in I.A.No.912/2019. The learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that there is no delay on the part of the petitioner in commencing the trial. The trial court had erroneously held that the petitioner has an opportunity to obtain the certified copies of the registered sale deeds and the said certificate and also he has opportunity to obtain said documents through Right to Information Act and failed to consider the fact that even if the certified copies under Right to Information Act are produced, the authority concerned has to be examined to confirm the genuineness of the said certified copies. However, mere filing of the certified copies is not sufficient. 6) Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the suit is filed in the year 2016. P.W.1 affidavit is filed on 22.02.2024, he was cross examined and thereafter the evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.3 is recorded. After cross examination of P.W.2 and P.W.3, this petition is filed to summon the Sub-Registrar, Krosuru to 5 produce the registered sale deeds and original certificate and to give evidence. The trial Court is of the opinion that the petitioner has opportunity to obtain the certified copies of the registered sale deeds and also the said certificate and he has also an opportunity to obtain the said documents by applying under Right to Information Act, but he did not apply the said documents 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. 7) The suit is of the year 2016 filed by the petitioner/ plaintiff. The opinion of the trial Court that to dragon the matter the petitioner has filed the present petition appears to be not correct. 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. 8) For the aforesaid reasons, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed by setting aside the order, dated 27.12.2024 passed in I.A.No.1414 of 2024 in O.S.No.322 of 2016 on the file of the Court of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli. As the suit is pertaining to the year 6 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 thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Date:14.08.2025 PGR 7 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1310 of 2025 Date: 14.08.2028 PGR