APHC010461172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2334/2025 Between: 1. SHAIK VALI BASHA, S/O.KHADAR SHARIF, AGE 28 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.7-3-161, KURBANIVARI VEEDHI, MAZID ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 2. SHAIK AFIZ,, S/O HABEED BASHA, AGE 38 YEARS, OPP. CHINNI MEDICAL SHOP, MAIN ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 3. MULLA VALI,, S/O MASTHAN, AGE 42 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 7- 5-20/3, SANJIV NAGAR, MUNICIPAL HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 4. SHAIK SAIFULLA, S/O MAHABOOB BASHA, AGE 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO.7-27-11/1, OPP. GUNNAM VENU MADHAV FUNCTION HALL, 7TH WARD, NEAR MUNICIPAL CHILDREN PARK, ADITYA COLLEGE ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 5. SHAIK BAJI (CO-OPTION NUMBER),, S/O KHADAR, AGE 45 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-11-8/1, UPSTAIRS OF RUCHI CURRY POINT, GOLLAGUDEM CENTRE, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 6. SHAIK ANWAR,, S/O KHADAR BASHA, AGE 37 YEARS. GOLD COVERING WORKS, GANDHI BOMMA CENTRE, BESIDE CEMENT SHOP, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 7. SHAIK SHAMSHUDDIN, S/O LAL BASHA, AGE 55 YEARS, R/O D.NO.4-1-24/2, GK JEWELLERY STREET, SALIPETA, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 8. SHAIK MAHABOOB BASHA,, S/O MOULALI, AGE 60 YEARS, R/O D. NO.7-27-11/1, OPP. GUNNAM VENU MADHAV FUNCTION HALL 7TH WARD, NEAR MUNICIPAL CHILDREN PARK, ADITYA COLLEGE ROAD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 9. SHAIK MUJIBUR REHMAN (MUJAMMIL),, S/O SHAFI-UR- RAHAMAN, AGE 56 YEARS, R/O METTA MASJID, BESIDE NIIT COLLEGE 1ST WARD, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 10.ABDUL GAFFAR,, S/O KHADAR, AGE 57 YEARS, R/O D.NO.4-35-11/2 7TH WARD, SUBBARAOPETA, 2 KSR,J C.R.P. No.2334 OF 2025 TADEPALLIGUDEM. 11.SARDAR KHAN, S/O ABDUL AMEER, AGE 46 YEARS, R/O D. NO.7-8-2. AMMAVARI PARK LINE, MOSQUE CENTER TADEPALLIGUDEM 12.SHAIK USMAN,, S/O BABJAN, AGE 42 YEARS, R/O D.NO.5- 19-34/1, BESIDE BIG MOSQUE, TADEPALLIGUDEM. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.MOHAMMAD ABULLAH BASHA, S/O ABDUL JABBAR, AGE 41 YEARS. BUSINESS, DOOR NO.4-23-5, HUSSAIN STREET, SUBBARAOPET, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 2.MOHAMMAD ABDUL LATHEEF, S/O ABDUL JABBAR, AGE 40 YEARS. BUSINESS, DOOR NO.4-28-5, HUSSAIN STREET, SUBBARAOPET, TADEPALLIGUDEM. 3.MOHAMMAD ABDUL VAHEED, S/O MAZID, AGE 63 YEARS, RETD. EMPLOYEE, SHAIKPET, R/O HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE. 4.MOHAMMAD SALEEM, S/O ABDUL VAHEED, AGE MAJOR, SHAIKPET, R/O HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE. 5.MOHAMMAD RIYAZ, S/O ABDUL VAHEED AGE MAJOR, SHAIKPET. R/O HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.P N MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.THUMMAPALA SHARADA 3 KSR,J C.R.P. No.2334 OF 2025 The Court made the following ORDER :- Questioning the order, dated 07.08.2025 passed in I.A.No.353 of 2024 in O.S.No.510 of 2019 by the learned Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tadepalligudem, the defendants filed the present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein filed the above suit seeking damages of Rs.10,00,000/-. The petitioners are contesting the said suit by filing written statement. Trial in the said suit was commenced and P.W.1 was already examined. When the above said suit is coming up for evidence of P.W.2, the respondents/plaintiffs filed the above said Interlocutory Application under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC seeking to receive certain documents mentioned in the said petition. 3. After hearing both sides, the said Interlocutory Application was allowed, which is impugned in the present Civil Revision Petition. 4. Heard Sri P.N.Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt T.Sarada, learned counsel for the respondents. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that all the documents referred in the said I.A. are irrelevant and there was no pleading in the plaint with regard to the said documents and the learned trial Judge ought not to have allowed the said Interlocutory Application. 4 KSR,J C.R.P. No.2334 OF 2025 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the C.R.P. contending that no prejudice would be caused to the petitioners/defendants by receiving such documents. 7. Perused the entire material on record. The Court below allowed the Application filed by the respondents/plaintiffs under Order VII Rule 14(3) CPC and received the documents. So far as the admissibility and relevancy of the documents is concerned, it is always open for the petitioners/defendants to raise their objections during the course of trial. Further, all those documents are subject to admissibility and relevancy. 8. With the above observations, granting liberty to the petitioners/defendants to raise all their objections during the course of trial with regard to the admissibility and relevancy of those documents, the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall also stand closed. ____ K.SURESH REDDY, J Dt. 19.09.2025 SAB 5 KSR,J C.R.P. No.2334 OF 2025 25 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2334 of 2025 Dt. 19.09.2025 SAB 6 KSR,J C.R.P. No.2334 OF 2025