APHC010192192026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3207] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1168/2026 Between: 1. INTI NAGA JYOTHI, S/O. SURESH, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D.NO. 1-183/1, MOGALIKUDURU VILLAGE, MAMIDIKUDURU MANDAL, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT- 533249. ...PETITIONER AND 1. ADABALA SURYA SATYA PRABHAKARA RAO, S/O. SITARAMA SWAMY, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE, RAZOLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT- 533242. 2. YEDIDA SURYA KESAVA RAO, S/O. SURYANARAYANA, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.TATIPAKA VILLAGE, RAZOLE MANDAL, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT. - 533249 3. ADDAGARLA SRIRAM KUMAR, S/O. UMA MAHESWARARAO, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O. NANDAMURU GARUVU VILLAGE, VEERAVASARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. - 534243 ...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 tobegs to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition 2 aggrieved by the dismissal Order dated 13-03- 2026 in I.A. No. 79 of 2026 in I.P. No. 1 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Razole IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 of all further proceedings in I.P.No.1 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Razole pending disposal of the Civil revision petition and pass CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1190/2026 Between: 1. INTI NAGA JYOTHI, S/O. SURESH, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. D.NO. 1-183/1, MOGALIKUDURU VILLAGE, MAMIDIKUDURU MANDAL, DR.B.R.AMBEDKARKONASEEMA DISTRICT- 533249. ...PETITIONER AND 1. ADABALA SURYA SATYA PRABHAKARA RAO, S/O. SITARAMA SWAMY, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE, RAZOLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT- 533242. 2. YEDIDA SURYA KESAVA RAO, S/O. SURYANARAYANA, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.TATIPAKA VILLAGE, RAZOLE MANDAL, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT. - 533249 3. ADDAGARLA SRIRAM KUMAR, S/O. UMA MAHESWARARAO, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O. NANDAMURU GARUVU VILLAGE, VEERAVASARAM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. - 534243 ...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 tobegs to present this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition 3 aggrieved by the dismissal Order dated 13-03-2026 in I.A. No. 58 of 2026 in I.P. No. 1 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Razole IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 of all further proceedings in I.P.No.1 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Razole pending disposal of the Civil revision petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND WRIT PETITION Nos.1168 and 1190 of 2026 COMMON ORDER: - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these Civil Revision Petitions are filed against the decree and order dated 13.03.2026, passed in I.A.No.79 of 2026 and I.A.No.58 of 2026 in I.P.No.1 of 2020, wherein the petitions filed by the revision petitioner under Order XVIII Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the CPC, requesting the Court to reopen the matter and to recall PW1 for further cross-examination on some material facts and evidence to establish the truth, has been dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner requested the Court to follow the procedure provided in the judgment of this Court in Badana Mutyalamma and another vs. Palli Appalaraju1 by granting an opportunity to invoke a recall petition afresh. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and on careful perusal of the order, dated 13.03.2026, in I.A.No.58 of 2026 in I.P.No.1 of 2020, it appears that on the ground that the petitioner did not disclose as to on what material facts he wants to further cross-examine PW1, the said petition is dismissed. 4. Now, the petitioner has come forward to follow the procedure provided in the judgment of this Court stated supra and he will submit a sealed 1 in 2016 (6) ALD 510 5 cover along with the questions, which he wants to put to the witness along with the petition. 5. In view of the same, this Court intends to give an opportunity to the petitioner to file an application afresh by following the procedure in the judgment of this Court in Badana Mutyalamma’s case (supra), to meet the interest of justice. 6. Accordingly, the order impugned in these revision petitions are set aside with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application as observed herein above. 7. In the result, both the Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Date: 24.04.2026 SA 6 185 & 186 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND CIVIL REVISION PETITION NOs.1168 & 1190 of 2026 Dt.24.04.2026 SA