APHC010622232023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE V: PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 331« OF Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the Order dated 23-11-2023 passed in lA No.129 of 2018 in IA.No.230 of 2010 in OS No.94 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri, Ananthapur District, Andhra Pradesh. Between: Aramadaka Sunanda Devi, W/o.Venkataramana years. Reddy, aged about 55 Road, Kamalanagar, Andhra Pradesh. Occ.Housewife, Ananthapuramu, Ananthapuramu District, R/o.Visa Hostel ...PETITIONER AND 1. G.M.Chandrasekhar, S/o.G.M.Venkatesu, Agriculture, R/o.D.No.1-585-D1, Upstairs, Ananthapur District, AP. 2. G.M.Anjaneyulu, S/o.G.M.Venkatesu, , Agriculture, R/o.D.No.1-585-D1, Upstairs, Railway Station Road, Kadiri Ananthapur District, AP. aged about 52 years, Occ; Railway Station Road, Kadiri, aged about 50 years, Occ: 4“ 3. G.M.Nagaraju, S/o.G.M.Venkatesu, aged about 48 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o.Amar Raj Batteries Limited, Karakambadi, Kadapa Road, Tirupati, Tirupati District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. G.M.Prajavathi Housewife, W/o.Sreenivasulu, aged about 32 years, Occ: R/o.C/o.K.Adinarayana, Sanjeevapuram, Penakacherla Dam Road, Yerragunta Post, Garladinne Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, AP. 5. G.M.Bharath, S/o.Sreenivasulu, aged about 19 years, Occ:Student, R/o.C/o.K.Adinarayana, Sanjeevapuram, Penakacherla Dam Road, Yerragunta Post, Garladinne Mandal, Ananthapuramu District, AP. 6. G.M.Teja, S/o.Sreenivasulu, aged about 16 years, Occ:Student, R/o.C/o.K.Adinarayana, Sanjeevapuram, Penakacherla Dam Road, Yerragunta Post, Garladinne Mandal, Ananthapuramu District (Respondent No.6 being minor rep.by his natural Guardian, mother 4th Respondent G.M.Prajavathi) AP. ...RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 202.3 Petition filed 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 suspend the operation of Order i I.A.No.230/2010 in O.S.No. 94/2008 dated 23-04-2023 of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri, Ananthapur District, Andhra Pradesh disposal of the above C.R.P. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents ; SRI K. SRINIVAS The Court made the following ORDER : in I.A.No.129/2018 in on the file of the Court pending APHC010622232023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3505] TUESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3318/2023 Between: 1.ARAMADAKA SUNANDA DEVI. W/O.VENKATARAMANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE R/O.ViSA HOSTEL ROAD, KAMALANAGAR ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH ...PETITIONER AND 1.G M CHANDRASEKHAR, S/O.G.M.VENKATESU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE R/O.D.NO.L- 585-DL, UPSTAIRS RAILWAY STATION ROAD. KADIRI ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, AP 2.G M ANJANEYULU, S/O.G.M.VENKATESU AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE R/O.D.NO.L-585-DL, UPSTAIRS RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KADIRI ANANTHAPURDISTRICT,AP 3.G M NAGARAJU, S/O.G.M.VENKATESU AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. OCC AGRICUTLURE R/O.AMAR RAJ BATTERIES LIMITED KARAKAMBADI, KADAPA ROAD, TIRUPATI TIRUPATI DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH 2 4.G M PRAJAVATHI, W/O.SREENIVASULU AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE R/O.C/O.K.ADINARAYANA SANJEEVAPURAM, PENAKACHERLA DAM ROAD YERRAGUNTA POST. GARLADINNE MANDAL ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, AP 5.B G M BHARATH, S/O.SREENIVASULU AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, OCCRSTUDENT R/O.C/0. K.ADINEIRAYANA SANJEEVAPURAM, PENAKACHERLA DAM ROAD YERRAGUNTA POST, GARLADINNE MANDAL ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT. AP 6.G M TEJA, S/O.SREENIVASULU AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, OCC.STUDENT R/O.C/0. K.ADINARAYANA SANJEEVAPURAM, PENAKACHERLA DAM ROAD YERRAGUNTA POST, GARLADINNE MANDAL ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, AP . (RESPONDENT N0.6 BEING MINOR REP.BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN, MOTHER 4TH RESPONDENT G.M.PRAJAVATHI) ...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 toPetitioner begs to present the above revision questioning the order dt 23-11-2023 passed in lA No. 129/2018 in lA.No.230/2010 in OS No.94/2008 is on the file of the Senior Civil Judge,Kadiri Ananthapur District.Andhra Pradesh lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 suspend the operation order in I.A.No. 129/2018 in I.A.No.230/2010 in O.S.No. 94/2008 dt.23-04-2023 on the file f the court of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri, Ananthapur District, Andhra Pradesh pending disposal of the above C.R.P. and pass such 3 r / Counsel for the Petitioner: 1 .GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.KSRINIVAS 4 The Court made the following order: The present revision petition is filed questioning order dated 23.11.2023, passed in lA No.129 of 2018 in OS No.94 of 2008, on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri, Ananthapur District. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in the suit, she filed suit for recovery of amount based on mortgage deed dated 18.11.1996. The respondents/defendants contested suit by filing written statement and upon hearing the parties, the trial court passed preliminary decreed on 31.03.2010 against the defendants by granting three (03) months time for redemption of the mortgage. Since the respondents did not come forward to pay the decreetal amount, the petitioner filed lA No.230 of 2010, seeking to pass final decree. Pending the said application, the respondents preferred lA No.67 of 2013, seeking to extend time for payment of decree. After hearing all parties, the said application was allowed by order dated 08.12.2017, whereby and whereunder the trial court directed the mortgagee to receive the amount and to issue full satisfaction certificate. Pursuant to the said orders, the respondents deposited entire decreetal amount, as per the said order and in view of the same, lA No.230 of 2010, filed by the petitioner/decree holder was closed by order dated 22.12.2017. Thereafter, the under Order 34 Rule 5 present application is filed by the respondents CPC, praying the court to direct the the registered sale and to issue discharge petitioner/plaintiff to deliver 27.10.1986 to them Registrar Office, Kadiri deed dated receipt at Sub- was allowed by the same, the present revision The said application impugned order. Questioning the petition is filed. 2. On perusal of the preferred lA No.67 of 2013, the preliminary decree dated application was allowed by order dated of the record, it is clear that the seeking to extend time to respondents comply with 31.03.2010. Upon contest, the said 08.12.2017. It is the case preferred revision petitioner/plaintiff that she questioning the said order before 2018, and the petition this Court in CRP No.5522 of same is pending adjudication. Though the revision petition was filed before this court way back in the petitioner kept quiet in the matter. The conduct of Shows that, she i the absence of impediment for the trial year 2018. the the petitioner IS not diligent in prosecuting the any stay granted by this court to proceed with the It is not out of place No.67 of 2013, the case on hand. In court, there is no application filed by the respondents, subsequent to the allowing of lA to mention that. respondents 6 i have admittedly paid entire decreetal amount before the trial court. Further, it is not out of place to mention that, the respondents borrowed an amount of Rs.80,000/- on 18.11.1996 and he has paid an amount of Rs.3,53,815/- towards full satisfaction of the decree. Further, in view of urban agglomeration, the value of the mortgaged property is drastically increased, keeping the same in mind, the petitioner cannot be allowed to knock away the property in dispute for a paltry amount. Further, the respondents paid the decreetal amount along with interest long ago. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that, the trial court rightly allowed the application failed by the respondents. For the reasons recorded supra, this court does not find any illegality in the order passed by the trial court and accordingly 3. the instant Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand SDI- A.VENUGOPALA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR closed. //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kadiri, Ananthapuramu District. " i 2. One CC to Sri Guttapaiem Vijaya Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri K.Srinivas, Advocate [OPUC] 4. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh Amaravathi 5. Two CD Copies BSV TAC at T HIGH COURT DATED: 15/07/2025 ORDER CRP NO. 3318 OF 2023 dismissing the civil revision petition WITHOUT COSTS