APHC010284402024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: Between: 1. YALAMARTHI SAMBRAJYAM, W/O Y. NARASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO. 3 KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. KATIVARAPU SIVAPARTHI, W/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO. 3 GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. KATIVARAPU RAMESH BABU,, S/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 1. YALAMARTHI NARASIMHA RAO, S/O KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/ GAYATRI NAGAR, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. KOLLI NARASIMHA RAO, S/O NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 3 VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 3. KOLLI PADMAVATHI, W/O. K.NARASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1464, 1465 & 1466 OF 2024 YALAMARTHI SAMBRAJYAM, W/O Y. NARASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO. 3 KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT SIVAPARTHI, W/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO. 3-111 A, KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT KATIVARAPU RAMESH BABU,, S/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, D.NO. 3 KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND YALAMARTHI NARASIMHA RAO, S/O KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO. 3 GAYATRI NAGAR, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, KOLLI NARASIMHA RAO, S/O NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 3-100/2, KOTHAPET, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT KOLLI PADMAVATHI, W/O. K.NARASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3333] THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 YALAMARTHI SAMBRAJYAM, W/O Y. NARASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO. 3-111 A, KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU SIVAPARTHI, W/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 111 A, KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, KATIVARAPU RAMESH BABU,, S/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED OCC PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, D.NO. 3-111 A, KOTHAPET, GANAPATHI NAGAR, VADDERAPALEM, ATMAKURU ...PETITIONER(S) YALAMARTHI NARASIMHA RAO, S/O KOTESWARA RAO, AGED O D.NO. 3-11, GAYATRI NAGAR, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, KOLLI NARASIMHA RAO, S/O NAGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, 100/2, KOTHAPET, ATMAKURU KOLLI PADMAVATHI, W/O. K.NARASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 2 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 YEARS OCC BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO. 3-100/2, KOTHAPET, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 4. CHITTIBOMMA SUNITHA, W/O CH. YUGANDHAR BABU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 1-72, THUMMAPADI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 5. CHITTIBOMMA YUGANDHAR BABU, S/O CH. NAGESWAR RAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 1-72, THUMMAPADI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT 6. KESANI VENKATA TIRUPATHI RAO, S/O POTHURAJU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 3-58, ATMAKURU VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...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 topleased to allow the civil revision petition by setting aside the common order dated. 20.06.2024 in suit O.S NO. 173 of 2013 on the file of the court of the XII Addl. District Judge, Vijayawada, in the interests of justice IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to stay all further proceedings in suit O.S.No.173 of 2013 on the file of the court of the XII Addl District Judge, Vijayawada, pending the Civil Revision Petition Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. D V SASIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAMA RAO KOCHIRI 2. BITRA RAMESH BABU 3 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 The Court made the following order: These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed challenging the common order passed in I.A.Nos.372, 373 and 374 of 2024 in O.S.No.173 of 2013 on the file of the XII Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, which were filed by the petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 3 in C.R.P.Nos.1466, 1465 & 1464 of 2024 respectively. 2. Respondent No.1/plaintiff filed O.S.No.173 of 2013 on the file of the Court of the XII Additional District Judge, Krishna, for declaration of title and for consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from executing any documents with regard to the plaint schedule property, contending that the plaint schedule property is self-acquired property of the respondent No.1/plaintiff. 3. Petitioners herein/defendants filed written statement, denying all the material averments made in the plaint, by specifically contesting that the plaint schedule property and other landed properties, which are in the name of the defendant No.1/petitioner No.1 herein, were not purchased by the respondent No.1 with his earnings or with the earnings of his father and further contended that the petitioner No.1/defendant No.1’s father has purchased the suit schedule property in his name and thereby the real estate business has improved. The plaintiff though worked as Government employee has not acquired any property till the year 2005 and moreover he is not having any financial capacity to purchase any properties. Pending the suit proceedings, 4 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 after completion of the trial and adducing evidence by both the parties, the petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 3 herein have filed I.A.Nos.372, 373 & 374 of 2024 in O.S.No.173 of 2013 to issue witness summons to the concerned parties. 4. I.A.No.372 of 2024 is filed by the petitioners under Order XVI Rule 1 and Section 151 of C.P.C., praying to issue witness summons to the Head Master, Z.P.H.School, Atmakur, Mangalagiri Mandal, with a direction to submit admission record pertaining to the plaintiff/respondent No.1 during the period 1975 to 1978, who joined in First Class and speak about the same in the interest of justice. 5. I.A.No.373 of 2024 is filed by the petitioners under Order XVI Rule 1 and Section 151 of C.P.C., praying to issue witness summons to the Secretary, Pavan Charitable Trust, Old Age Home, Datta Asramam Road, Opposite to Gannavaram Airport, Gannavaram, with a direction to produce the record about the joining of Yalamarthi Koteswara Rao, S/o. Yalamarthi Krishna in the old age home in the interest of justice. 6. I.A.No.374 of 2024 is filed by the petitioners under Order XVI Rule 1 and Section 151 of C.P.C., praying to issue witness summons to the proprietor, Sri Bhavani Gas Company, D.No.1-3/27-9/6, Opposite R.T.C. Work shop road, Vidhyadharapuram, Vijayawada, with a direction to produce the records relating to salary and attendance pertaining to the plaintiff i.e., 5 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 Yalamarthi Narasimha Rao, from 2000 to till date and speak about the same in the interest of justice. 7. The Court below dismissed the said applications on the ground that the said applications were filed after closing the plaintiff side evidence and even the evidence of the defendant Nos.1 to 8 was closed and also on the ground that the burden to prove whether the plaintiff has any capacity to purchase the schedule property or not is on the plaintiff but not on the defendants i.e., the petitioners/defendants herein. The Court also held that the suit relates to the year 2013 and almost after a lapse of 11 years, the said applications have been filed to prolong the litigation. 8. All the three applications were dismissed by way of a common order by the Court below by the order dated 20.6.2024. Challenging the same, the present Civil Revision Petitions came to be filed. 9. Heard Sri D.V.Sasidhar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Rama Rao Kochiri, learned counsel for the respondents. 10. Even on a perusal of the I.A.’s filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it can be seen that I.A.No.372 of 2024 is filed to prove the financial capacity and this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners would not achieve anything by summoning the Head Master, Z.P.H.School, Atmakur, Mangalagiri Mandal. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to interfere with I.A.No.372 of 2024. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition No.1466 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed. 6 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 11. I.A.No.373 of 2024 is filed to prove the source of income of the plaintiff to purchase the plaint schedule property and the Court below held that petitioners herein could not prove anything by summoning the Secretary, Pavan Charitable Trust, Old Age Home, Datta Asramam Road, Opposite to Gannavaram Airport, Gannavaram. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed in I.A.No.373 of 2024. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition No.1465 of 2024 is liable to be dismissed. 12. I.A.No.374 of 2024 is filed to issue witness summons to the proprietor, Sri Bhavani Gas Company, D.No.1-3/27-9/6, Opposite R.T.C. Work shop road, Vidhyadharapuram, Vijayawada, where the plaintiff is working. To establish the income of the plaintiff, this Court is of the opinion that I.A.No.374 of 2024 can be allowed, as the earning capacity of the plaintiff would prove his capacity to purchase the schedule properties. 13. Accordingly, common order passed by the Court below is set aside only to the extent in I.A.No.374 of 2024 wherein the petitioners sought to issue summons to the proprietor, Sri Bhavani Gas Company, D.No.1-3/27-9/6, Opposite R.T.C. Work shop road, Vidhyadharapuram, Vijayawada, to the extent of the earnings of the petitioner as P.W.1 has deposed during the cross-examination that he is earning Rs.60,000/- per annum since 2000 by working in Bhavani Gas Company. 7 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 14. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition Nos. 1465 and 1466 of 2024 are dismissed and the Civil Revision Petition No. 1464 of 2024 is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 25.09.2025 TJN/BSK 8 VS, J C.R.P.Nos.1464, 1465 & 1466 of 2024 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1464, 1465 & 1466 OF 2024 Date: 25.09.2025 TJN/BSK