1 APHC010462992026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] SATURDAY, THE 10th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2437/2026 Between: 1. NESE SAVITRAMMA, , W/O. NESE RAMAMUTTHY,AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O. VENKATAPURAM VILLAGE OF YEMMIGANURTOWN AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 2. NESE CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/O. NESE RAMAMURTHY,AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS,R/O. VENKATAPURAM VILLAGE OF YEMMIGANURTOWN AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 3. PG SWATHI, , W/O. CHANDRA SEKHAR,AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O. VENKATAPURAM VILLAGE OF YEMMIGANURTOWN AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. A MUNEMMA, W/O. LATE RANGA MUNI,AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE,R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL,KURNOOL DISTRICT 2. A RAMA CHANDRUDU, S/O. LATE RANGA MUNIAGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL,KURNOOL DISTRICT 3. A YELLAIAH, S/O. LATE RANGA MUNI,AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL,KURNOOL DISTRICT 4. A KRISHNAIAH, , S/O. LATE RANGA MUNIAGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL,KURNOOL DISTRICT 5. A RANGASWAMY, S/O. LATE RANGA MUNIAGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL,KURNOOL DISTRICT 2 6. A SHANKAR BABU, S/O. LATE RANGA MUNI,AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE, PEAPULLY MANDAL,KURNOOL DISTRICT 7. A LAKSHMI DEVI, W/O. NEELAKANTAIAH,D/O. LATE RANGA MUNI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE,PEAPULLY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 8. A DHANAMMA ALIAS LAKSHMI, , W/O. KONDAIAH,D/O. LATE RANGA MUNI, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE,PEAPULLY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 9. A SALAMMA ALIAS SARASWATHI, W/O RAMU,D/O. LATE RANGA MUNI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGE,PEAPULLY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 10. A RAMESWARI ALIAS SUSMA, , W/O. NAGARAJD/O. LATE RANGA MUNI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. OBULAWARIPALLI VILLAGEPEAPULLY MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 11. NESE MADANNA, S/O. NESE TIPPANNA,AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,R/O. VENKATAPURAM VILLAGE OF YEMMIGANURTOWN AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT 12. NESE RAMA MURTHY, S/O. NESE TIPPANNA,AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERR/O. VENKATAPURAM VILLAGE OF YEMMIGANURTOWN AND MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. K RAMA KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K V RAGHU VEER 2. MARELLA RADHA 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2437 of 2026 ORDER : Questioning the docket order dated 27.08.2026 passed in CFR No.1858 of 2026 in E.A.No. of 2026 in E.P.No.33 of 2024 in O.S.No.43 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yemmiganuru, the proposed implead petitioners filed the present Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Brief facts of the case are that respondents 1 to 10 filed O.S. No. 43 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yemmiganuru, seeking recovery of possession of suit scheduled property from respondents 11 and 12. The said suit was decreed by judgment and decree dated 30.01.2024. The said judgment and decree have attained finality, and no appeal has been preferred against the same. Thereafter, respondents 1 to 10 filed E.P. No. 33 of 2024 in O.S. No. 43 of 2015, seeking execution of the decree. During pendency of the said E.P., as the judgment debtors were not honoring the decree, respondents 1 to 10 filed an application seeking police aid to evict the judgment debtors from the E.P. Schedule property. The said I.A. was dismissed, questioning which respondents 1 to 10 filed C.R.P. No. 1737 of 2025 before this Court. This Court allowed the said C.R.P., directing grant of police aid for the execution of the decree. Thereafter, the petitioners herein filed the present claim petition, contending that they have right over the subject property and have been running a chicken centre on the said property for the last 25 years. The said claim petition was rejected, which is impugned in the present C.R.P. 4 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the entire material on record. 4. The judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 43 of 2015 has attained finality, and no appeal has been preferred against the same. Admittedly, the petitioners have no title to the E.P. scheduled property, nor have they produced even a single document to establish their title over the said property, either in the present proceedings or in the earlier round of litigation, i.e., C.R.P. No. 1737 of 2025. Respondent No. 11 has not raised any objection or put forth any claim in this regard. It appears that, having exhausted all available remedies, respondent No. 11 has set up the present petitioners with the present claim petition. In such circumstances, there are no grounds to interfere with the docket order dated 27.08.2026 passed in CFR No.1858 of 2026 in E.A.No. of 2026 in E.P.No.33 of 2024 in O.S.No.43 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Yemmiganuru. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. __________________ K SURESH REDDY, J Date: 10.10.2026 Asr 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2437 of 2026 Date: 10.10.2026 ASR