APHC010524982025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3052/2025 Between: T LAKSHMI SARITHA @ B LAKSHMI SARITHA, W/O. T. GANGADHAR, D/O. B. LAKSHMINARAYANA PRASAD, AGED 43 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O. D.NO. 85, NARASINGARAO PETA, GUDURU, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND T GANGADHAR, S/o. Late, Narasimhulu, Age 44 years, Occ Petty Business, R/o. Villa No.9, Sandeep Villas, Chitravathi Bypass Raod, Puttaparthi, Ananthapuram District. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KISHORE KUMAR KATARI 2 KSR,J C.R.P. No.3052 OF 2025 The Court made the following ORDER :- Aggrieved by the docket order, dated 09.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.30 of 2024 in H.M.O.P.No.81 of 2023 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, which was filed under Order VII Rule 14 and Section 151 CPC seeking to receive the documents filed by the respondent herein in the above H.M.O.P., the petitioner/respondent filed the present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The respondent herein filed H.M.O.P.No.81 of 2023 against the petitioner herein seeking dissolution of marriage. The said H.M.O.P. is pending. The chief affidavit of the respondent herein was already filed. At that stage, he filed I.A.No.30 of 2024 seeking to receive the documents. 3. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Gudur passed the following docket order in I.A.No.30 of 2024 : - “Respondent absent. No representation. Inspite of granting several opportunities the respondent did not turn up and file counter. Costs not paid. For filing of counter is forfeited. Heard the ld. Counsel for the petitioner. If the petition is allowed. No prejudice would be caused. As there is direction of Hon’ble Supreme Court to dispose of within one year. Hence, I am inclined to allow the petition in the interest of justice only original and certified copies are received subject to proof and admissibility.” 3 KSR,J C.R.P. No.3052 OF 2025 4. As seen from the said docket order, despite being given sufficient opportunities, the petitioner did not appear. Further, by virtue of the impugned docket order, the documents filed on behalf of the respondent/husband have been received. The docket order also specifically stated that the said documents were received “subject to proof and admissibility”. Since the rights of the petitioner stand protected by the said observation, there is no illegality in the impugned order. 5. With the above observations, the present Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, at the admission stage. The petitioner is at liberty to raise her objections with regard to the admissibility and proof of the documents before the trial Court. 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. 14.11.2025 SAB 4 KSR,J C.R.P. No.3052 OF 2025 69 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3052 of 2025 Dt. 14.11.2025 SAB