APHC010130902025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ATAMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1067 OF 2025 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 revise the order dated 10.12.2024 passed in I.A.No.755 of 2023 in O.S.No.469 of 2016 on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Vishakhapatnam. Between: Lalam Demullamma, W/o. Appalaswamy, Aged about 75 years, R/o. Janguluru, Atchutapuram Mandal, Vishakhapatnam. ...Petitioner/Petitioner/Proposed Party AND 1. Vuppalapati Venkata Ramana Murthy Raju, S/o Rajan Raju, Aged about 69 years, R/o. D.No.12-1, Rambilli Village and Mandal, Vishakhapatnam. ...Respondent/Respondent/Plaintiff 2. Lalam Peda Satyam, S/o. Ramaswamy, Aged about 69 years, R/o. Dopperla Village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Vishakhapatnam. 3. Lalam China Satyam, S/o Ramaswamy, Aged about 65 years, R/o. Dopperla Village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Vishakhapatnam. Chinnammalu, D/o. Lalam Chinnodu, Aged about 62 4. Lalam Chinabulli R/o Dopperla Village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Vishakhapatnam. years, 5. Lalam Surya Kumari, W/o. Ramaswamy, Aged about 59 years R/o. Dopperla Village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Vishakhapatnam. ...Respondents/Respondent/Defendants lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased O.S 469/2016 On in the affidavit filed in may the file of the XI Additional of the C.R.P. be pleased to grant Stay of all further proceedings in District Judge, Vishakhapatnam, pending disposal This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of hearing the arguments of Sri Akhil Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon Krishnan, Advocate for the Petitioner the Respondent. and the Sri. and the Sri. P. Rajasekhar, on behalf of The Court made the following Order; -'A'A- IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH SAPHC010130902025 [3206] IP AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1067/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Lalam Demullamma AND ...RESPONDENT(S) Vuppalapati Venkata Ramana Murthy Raju and Others Counsel for the Petitioner; 1.AKHILKRISHNAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.P RAJASEKHAR The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) respondent herein had filed O.S.No.469 of 2016 before the XI Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, against respondents 2 to 5, for specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 12.10.2007, to an St The 1 extent of Ac.6.00 cents of land in Sy.No.51/2 of Duppituru Village, Atchutapuram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner herein filed I.A.No.755 of 2023 seeking to implead herself in the suit. The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner up to Ac.3.14 cents of land in Sy.No.50/2 of the said village and that she and her husband O.S.No.274 of 2006 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Yelamanchili for permanent injunction against the defendants in the suit (who are had filed arrayed as respondents 2 to 4 herein) and that the said suit had been decreed. On 29.05.2014, A.S.No.14 of 2014 had been filed before Senior Civil Judge, Yelamanchili against this order and it was also dismissed on 07.03.2023. The petitioner contends that 4, having lost the suit and appeal have now come up with a collusive suit wherein respondent No.1 is ostensibly seeking specific performance of agreement of sale executed by respondents 2 to 5, by way of this suit. The petitioner contended that on account of this collusive suit, there i: every possibility of the rights of the petitioner getting affected and the respondents seeking eviction of the petitioner from the said land under the guise of execution of any decree that may be obtained. the respondents 2 to an IS 3 The respondents resisted this application on the ground that the land claimed by the petitioner is in Sy.No.50/2 and whereas the suit schedule property is situated in Sy.No.51/2 and as such, she has no locus to implead herself in the suit. The trial Court after considering the rival submission had dismissed the application on the ground that documents to demonstrate her title over the said land have not been placed before the trial Court. 3. necessary aforesaid order of dismissal, Aggrieved by the dated 10.12.2024, the petitioner has approached this Court. 4. Heard Sri Akhil Krishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. Rajasekhar, learned counsel for the respondents. 5. Sri Akhil Krishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the suit is a collusive suit and the presence of the petitioner is necessary for a proper adjudication as to whether the 1®‘ respondent has any title to convey to respondents 2 to 5. On the other hand, Sri P. Rajasekhar, learned counsel for the respondents would contend that the petitioner has no role in the suit inasmuch as the land in question does not belong to the petitioner and in any event the petitioner claims land only in Sy.No.50/2 while the suit schedule property is in Sy.No.51/2. 6. 4 7. This Court does not propose to go into these rival submissions inasmuch as the respondents themselves contend that the land in question is not the land being claimed by the petitioner. In such event, any decree obtained by the respondents would not affect any of the rights or title of the petitioner over the land being claimed by her. in such circumstances, there would be no necessity to implead the petitioner as any decree obtained by the respondents cannot be used against the petitioner. an 8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- A VENUGOPALA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The XI Additional District Judge, Vishakhapatnam. 2. One CC to Sri. Akhil Krishnan, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri. P Rajasekhar, Advocate [OPUC 4. Two C.D Copies. Ssl sree HIGH COURT DATED:18/07/2025 ORDER CRP NO. 1067 OF 2025 CLOSING THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION WITHOUT COSTS