APHC010044402019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3365] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE DR V R K KRUPA SAGAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 475/2019 Between: Tadepalli Subba Rao (died) and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Shaik Mahaboob Subhani and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. CHETLURU SREENIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P PRABHAKAR RAO The Court made the following: 2 Dr.VRKS,J CRP.No.475 of 2019 THE HON’BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 475 of 2019 ORDER: 1. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed, impugning the order dated 12.03.2018 in I.A.No.280 of 2017 in O.S.No.3 of 2015 on the file of learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. 2. Sri Ch.Srinivas, the learned counsel for revision petitioners and Sri P.Prabhakar Rao, the learned counsel for respondents are present and submitted arguments. 3. Perused the record. 4. Three plaintiffs together filed O.S.No.3 of 2015 before learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. There are two defendants in the suit. The prayer in the suit assails the registered sale deed dated 20.10.2010 alleged to have been fraudulently executed by defendant No.2 in favour of defendant No.1. 5. The suit was coming on for trial and on 18.01.2017, the suit was dismissed for default. Thereafter, the plaintiffs intended to take remedial steps and filed I.A.No.280 of 2017 which was an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone 62 days delay in filing an application to set aside the dismiss for 3 Dr.VRKS,J CRP.No.475 of 2019 default order. By an order dated 12.03.2018, the learned trial court allowed the petition by condoning the delay. 6. The present revision was filed by the legal representatives of D1/ Sri T.Subba Rao. 7. The said I.A.No.280 of 2017 was filed on 22.04.2017 and the impugned order was passed on 12.03.2018. A few things have happened between these two dates. D1/ Sri T.Subba Rao died on 17.05.2017. D2/ Sri Syed Silar Saheb died on 31.12.2016. The cause title in I.A.No.280 of 2017 in the respondents column refers only Sri T.Subba Rao/D1. It completely omitted to mention the name of original D2/ Sri Syed Silar Saheb. Thus, I.A.No.280 of 2017 was not filed as against D2 which is impermissible. After presentation of I.A.No.280 of 2017 before hearing was taken up before the court below even D1 died. That obligates the plaintiffs to take necessary steps to implead legal representatives of both the defendants. Learned trial court overlooked these aspects and simply allowed the delay condone petition. 8. In the above referred circumstances, it is found just and necessary to set aside the impugned order dated 12.03.2018 of learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur in I.A.No.280 of 4 Dr.VRKS,J CRP.No.475 of 2019 2017 in O.S.No.3 of 2015. The learned trial court has to take I.A.No.280 of 2017 and the petitioners therein who are the plaintiffs in the suit have to move necessary applications to implead legal representatives of Sri T.Subba Rao/D1 who is already there in the cause title and also Sri Syed Silar Saheb/D2. After completing all those legal formalities and after giving due opportunity to both sides, I.A.No.280 of 2017 shall be disposed of in accordance with law by the court below. 9. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. Consequently, order dated 12.03.2018 in I.A.No.280 of 2017 in O.S.No.3 of 2015 is set aside. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR, J Date:27.03.2025 Dvs 5 Dr.VRKS,J CRP.No.475 of 2019 THE HON’BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR CRP No. 475 of 2019 Date: 27.03.2025 Dvs