APHC010601522025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3206] FRIDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3097/2025 Between: 1. KARUMANCHI RAMA RAO, S/O KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED 52 YEARS. R/O D.NO. 1-819/A, AJAY NAGAR, 32ND WARD, BESIDES TOWN TDP OFFICE, MANGALAGIRI TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. RAVI RATNA KIRETI, S/o Late Ravi Surya Prakash Rao, Aged 40 years, R/o D.No.40-26-1/2, Tikkal Road, Vijayawada ...RESPONDENT 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 revision by setting aside the order dated 22/09/2025 in I.A. No. 134 of 2025 in O.S. No.366 of 2017 on the file of Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mangalagiri, Guntur District in the interest of justice and 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 may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in O.S. No.366 of 2017 on the file of Addl. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mangalagiri, Guntur District in the interest of justice and pass 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CH B R P SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. 3 The Court made the following Order: The petitioner filed in O.S.No.366 of 20175 before the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Mangalagiri, for a permanent injunction restraining the respondent herein from interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner over a house standing on 250 Sq.yards of land in Mangalagiri Municipality. The respondent herein, in the course of cross- examining the petitioner had produced two photostats of affidavits filed by the petitioner, when he stood as an independent candidate, for Mangalagiri Assembly Seat in the year 2014-2019, wherein the petitioner had declared that he had no properties. Upon being confronted with these documents, the petitioner had accepted that he had filed the originals of these exhibits before the Returning Officer. These documents were marked as Exs.B1 and B2. 2. The petitioner, had thereafter moved I.A.No.134 of 2025 under Order 13 Rule 3 read with section 151 of CPC for demarking Exs.B1 and B2. 3. The Trial Court by an order, dated 22.09.2025 had dismissed this application. Apart from that the Trial Court had also taken the view that this was a frivolous and vexatious petition and imposed costs of Rs.5,000/- payable to the Mandal Legal Service Authority. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner approached this Court contending that the order of the Trial Court requires to be set aside in as much as the affidavits are inadmissible in evidence. 4 5. The Trial Court following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.V.E.Venkatachala Gounder vs. Arulmigu Viswesaraswami & V.P.Temple & AR 1 had held that the petitioner having consented to the marking of these documents and having admitted the fact that these are the copies of affidavits filed by him before the Returning Officer, cannot seek exclusion of such documents. 6. In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court does not find any reason to intervene in the matter and this revision petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the costs of Rs.5,000/- levied by the Trial Court is waived. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J Date: 14.11.2025 KA/KSS 1 AIR 2003 SC 4548 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:3097 OF 2025 Date: 14.11.2025 KA/KSS