APHC010481642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NOs: 2393 & 2364/2025 CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2393/2025 Between: 1. SUGGU PAPAMMA, W/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, ICHAPURAM, SRIKAKULAM 2. SUGGU KESUBABU ,, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O BRAHMIN STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. 3. SUGGU NARAYANA REDDY,, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, D.NO.39-17-14/2 PADMALALYAM, MADHAVA DHARA, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPANTAM PIN-530 018., SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. .... PETITIONERS / DEFENDANTS 3 TO 5 IN O.S. 30/2016 (ADDED AS PER ORDERS IN I.A. 153/2024 IN O.S. 30/2016) ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. PRABHASH CHANDRA GAJAPATHI NARAYANA DEO, S/O LATE SATYANARAYANA GAJAPATHI NARAYANA DEO, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS. BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF KHAZANA STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. RESPONDENT NO.1/ ( PETITIONER IN I.A. 153/2024 IN OS. 30/2016)/PLAINTIFF, 2. GOLDEN LANDS DEVELOPERS REGD COMPANY LTD, LOCATED AT ASKA ROAD, BRAHMAPUR, GANJAM DISTRICT ODISHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL ADVISOR. 3. SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, (DIED), S/O JAGANNADHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, HARIJANA VEEDHI, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. -RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 / RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 IN I.A.NO. 153/2024 IN O.S.30/2016 / DEFENDANTS 1 AND 2 4. SUGGU BHEEMA RAO, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. 5. SUGGU SRIDHARA RAO, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. 6. SUGGU PADMA, D/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P ...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 allow the Civil Revision Petition by dismissing the I.A.No. 153/2024 in O.S.No. 30 of 2016 on the file of the Hon'ble Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram Srikakulam District by setting aside the orders and decree dt.30.06.2025 passed in I.A.No. 153/2024 in O.S. 30/2016 on the file of the Hon'ble Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram Srikakulam District, and to pass 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 to stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), ichapuram , Srikakulam District during the pendency of the main C.R.P., and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2364/2025 Between: 1. SUGGU PAPAMMA,, W/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/O KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, ICHAPURAM, SRIKAKULAM 2. SUGGU KESUBABU ,, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O BRAHMIN STREET ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. 3. SUGGU NARAYANA REDDY,, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, D.NO.39-17-14/2 PADMALALYAM, MADHAVA DHARA, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPANTAM PIN-530 018., SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. PRABHASH CHANDRA GAJAPATHI NARAYANA DEO, S/O LATE SATYANARAYANA GAJAPATHI NARAYANA DEO, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS. BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF KHAZANA STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. 2. GOLDEN LANDS DEVELOPERS REGD COMPANY LTD, LOCATED AT ASKA ROAD, BRAHMAPUR, GANJAM DISTRICT, ODISHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL ADVISOR. 3. SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY DIED, S/O JAGANNADHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, HARIJANA VEEDHI, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. 4. SUGGU BHEEMA RAO, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 5. SUGGU SRIDHARA RAO, S/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARJEE STREET ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 6. SUGGU PADMA, D/O LATE SUGGU DEVENDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KARJEE STREET, ICHAPURAM TOWN AND POST, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, A.P. ...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 allow the Civil Revision Petition by dismissing the I.A.No. 152/2024 in O.S.No. 30 of 2016 on the file of the Hon'ble Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram Srikakulam District by setting aside the orders and decree dt.30.06.2025 passed in I.A.No. 152/2024 in O.S. 30/2016 on the file of the Hon'ble Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram Srikakulam District 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 to stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram , Srikakulam District during the pendency of the main C.R.P. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA The Court made the following: ::COMMON ORDER :: The above civil revision petitions are filed assailing the two separate orders dated 30.06.2025 passed in I.A.Nos.152 of 2024 & 153 of 2024 in O.S.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram, Srikakulam District. Page 5 of 8 2. Heard Sri C. Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri K.V. Rama Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1/plaintiff in the suit. 3. Since the issue involved in both the civil revision petitions is the same, the civil revision petitions are disposed of by way of a common order. 4. The plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.30 of 2016 against the two defendants seeking a perpetual injunction. Pending the suit, the 2nd defendant by name Suggu Devendra Reddy, died intestate on 16.06.2024. The plaintiff filed I.A.No.152 of 2024 under Order 22 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure r/w 146 of Civil Rules of Practice to add the legal representatives of the deceased 2nd respondent as defendants 3 to 8, and I.A.No.153 of 2024 under Order 22 Rule 4 of CPC r/w 28 of Civil Rules of Practice for consequential amendments. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.152 of 2024 was pleaded that pending the suit, respondent No.2 died intestate on 16.06.2024, leaving behind his wife, sons and daughter as legal heirs and thus, prayed to bring them as defendants 3 to 8 on record. Respondent No.1/defendant filed a counter-affidavit. 6. The learned Trial Court, without ordering notice to the proposed parties, by two separate orders dated 30.06.2025, allowed I.A.Nos.152 & 153 of 2024. Against the order in I.A.No.152 of 2024, the defendants 3 to 5 filed C.R.P.No.2364 of 2025, and against the order in I.A.No.153 of 2024, the defendants 3 to 5 filed C.R.P.No.2393 of 2025. 7. Sri C. Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that the Trial Court, without ordering notice to the proposed parties, impleaded them as party respondents to the suit. He would also submit that the suit is filed for injunction and hence, impleading the legal representatives of 2nd defendant, without there being any averment in the affidavit regarding their interference, is impermissible. Page 6 of 8 8. On the other hand, Sri K.V. Rama Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/plaintiff, supported the order passed by the Trial Court. 9. The point for consideration is: <Whether the orders dated 30.06.2025 passed in I.A.Nos.152 of 2024 & 153 of 2024 in O.S.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, require any interference?= 10. As seen from the material available on record, there is no dispute that the respondent No.1/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.30 of 2016 against the two defendants. Pending the suit, defendant No.2 died on 16.06.2024. Since the defendant No.2 died, the plaintiff invoked Order 22 Rule 4 of CPC and filed the aforementioned interlocutory applications to bring the legal representatives of respondent No.2 on record and for consequential amendments. 11. It is appropriate to extract Order 22 Rule 4(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure hereunder: <Where one of two or more defendants dies and the right to sue does not survive against the surviving defendant or defendants alone, or a sole defendant or sole surviving defendant dies and the right to sue survives, the Court, on an application made in that behalf, shall cause the legal representative of the deceased defendant to be made a party and shall proceed with the suit.= (emphasis is mine) 12. A perusal of the provision extracted supra would mandate that before adding the proposed legal representatives, the Court, >shall cause? notice to the proposed legal representatives and upon hearing the proposed legal representatives, the Court must decide as to whether the proposed legal representatives are proper and necessary parties for an appropriate adjudication of the dispute. 13. In the case at hand, no notice was issued to the proposed parties. Without issuing any notice to the proposed parties, the Trial Court allowed the interlocutory applications filed by the plaintiff. The course adopted by the Trial Court, in the considered opinion of this court, is contrary to Order 22 Rule 4 of CPC. 14. Since the Trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction i.e. non-issuance of notice to the proposed parties, the order of revision needs to be interfered. Thus, the orders dated 30.06.2025 in I.A.Nos.152 of 2024 & 153 of 2024 in O.S.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, are liable to be set aside. 15. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Civil Revision Petitions are allowed by setting aside the two separate orders dated 30.06.2025, passed in I.A.Nos.152 of 2024 & 153 of 2024 in O.S.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram, Srikakulam District. I.A.Nos.152 of 2024 & 153 of 2024 in O.S.No.30 of 2016 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ichapuram, Srikakulam District, are restored. The Trial Court shall issue notice to the proposed parties and follow the procedure mandated under Order 22 Rule 4 of the CPC, and pass appropriate orders. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 17.10.2025 TVN 162 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CIVIL REVISION PETTION Nos.2393 & 2364 OF 2025 Date: 17.10.2025 TVN