APHC010528002022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1953/2022 Between: 1. VUYYURI VENKATA SURYA PRAKASA RAO, S/O SRI VISHWANATHAM, HINDU, AGE. 71 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 5-135, KARAPA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. VUYYURIGOAPALA KRISHNA GANGARAJU, S/O SRI SESHAGIRI RAO, C/O V.V.V.LAKSHMINARAYANA, R/O D.NO. 57-1-30, C-3, KAKILETI RESIDENCY, MUNSUB GARI JUNCTION, JAGANNAIKPUR, KAKINADA 533 002 . 2. KONA KALYANA CHAKRAVARTHY, S/O SRI SATYANARAYANA, VENKUNAIDU PETA, NARSIPATNAM 531 116, ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT 3. VUYYURI POORNA NAGESWARA RAO, S/O SRI VENKATA SUBBA RAO, R/O D.NO. 5-116, GAJULAVARI STREET, KARAPA 533 462, KAKINADA DISTRICT 4. NOOKALA SRINIVAS RAVIKUMAR, S/O SRI VISWESWARA RAO, R/O FLAT NO. 104, MYTHRINIVAS APARTMENT, VIMALADEVI NAGAR, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD 500 047 5. VUYYURI RAMA CHANDRA RAO, S/O SRI VENKATA RAO, KIRANA SHOP NEAR GANTALAMMA TEMPLE, KARAPA 533 462, KAKINADA DISTRICT 2 TCDS,J CRP.No.1953 of 2022 ...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 call for the records relating to I.A.No. 321 of 2021 in A.S.No. 63 of 2018 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada, dated 06- 07-2022 and set aside the order made therein and consequently allow the I.A. in the interest of justice and pass such other order IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying for the reasons stated in the accompanying Affidavit, the Petitioner herein prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in A.S.No. 63 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada, pending disposal of the present C.R.P. and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 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 may be pleased to extend the interim order granted in l.A. No. 1 of 2022 in CRP No. 1953 of 2022 dated 29-09-2022 and extended from time to time and lastly on 22-10-2024, pending disposal of the CRP and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. A RADHAKRISHNA The Court made the following: 3 TCDS,J CRP.No.1953 of 2022 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1953 of 2022 ORDER: The present revision petition is filed aggrieved by order dated 06.07.2022 passed in I.A.No.321 of 2021 in A.S.No.63 of 2018 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada. 2. The petitioner is plaintiff in the suit. He filed a suit for mandatory injunction on the file of II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada seeking to pass judgment and decree in his favour by directing the first respondent herein to remove the wall existing in the suit schedule property. After hearing the parties, the said suit was dismissed by judgment and decree dated 30.11.2017. The petitioner herein filed a regular appeal videA.S.No.63 of 2018 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Kakinada, questioning the said decree. Pending the appeal, the present application is filed under Order 1 Rule 10 r/w Order VI Rule 17 CPC to permit the petitioner to add the proposed respondents 2 to 5 herein so as to prove the case of the petitioner/appellant. It is stated that the proposed respondents are the legal heirs of the vendor of petitioner herein. The said application, after consideration, was dismissed by impugned order. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the proposed parties are proper and necessary parties to prove his claim 4 TCDS,J CRP.No.1953 of 2022 over the suit schedule property and therefore, the present application is filed. 4. On perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the application, absolutely nothing is stated as to how the proposed parties are necessary parties to the appeal. Except stating that they are necessary parties, nothing is explained in the affidavit. It is pertinent to note that, despite the specific plea taken by the respondents in the written statement, for the reasons best known to the petitioner, he did not choose to take steps pending the suit. The appellate Court having considered the case of the petitioner, dismissed the said application on the ground that despite the petitioner having knowledge that the proposed parties are necessary during pendency of the suit, he did not take steps to add them as party defendants to the suit. Considering the case of the petitioner, the appellate Court has rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner. In view of the same, there are no merits in the revision and there is no illegality in the order passed by the appellate Court. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed.There shall be no order as to costs. 5 TCDS,J CRP.No.1953 of 2022 As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR Dt: 31.07.2025 sj 6 TCDS,J CRP.No.1953 of 2022 150 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR CRP No.1953 of 2022 Date 31.07.2025 sj