APHC010581902025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3206] FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2916/2025 Between: 1. P S KIRANMAYEE, W/O.NALLURI CHITTIBABU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEAR EMPLOYEE, R/O.D.NO.4-47-9, ADITYA ROYAL, FLAT NO. 104, LAWSONS BAY COLONY, PEDA WALTAIR, L.B.COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM 2. .PINAPATI JYOTSNA,, W/O.ALURI SOUZA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. PLOT NO.255, F3,1ST FLOOR, PRAKRUTHI APARTMENTS, KUBEAN NAGAR 9TH STREET EXT. MADIPAKKAM CHENNAI- 600091. (BOTH R/O.TENALI AND TEMPORARILY COME DOWN TO TENALI) ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. PINAPATI ANANYA, D/O.LATE SARAT CHANDAR, AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, STUDENT, BEING MINOR REP. BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN, PINAPATI @ BOLLEPU SUNEETHA, W/O.LATE SARAT CHANDAR 2. PINAPATI ANANYA, D/O.LATE SARAT CHANDAR, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS. STUDENT BEING MINOR, REP. BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN, PINAPATI @ BOLLEPU SUNEETHA, W/O.LATE SARAT CHANDAR 3. S DR PINAPATI BOLLIPO SUNEETHA, W/O.LATE SARAT CHANDAR, PROFESSOR, (MOTHER OF PLAINTIFF 1 AND 2/3 RD PLAINTIFF) ALL ABOVE 1 TO 3 RESPONDENTS ARE RESIDENTS OF D.NO.54-1-7/22, FLAT NO. 101, BLUE SKY, BRUNDAVAN 2 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2916 of 2025 APARTMENTS,ROAD NO.2, MAHANADU ROAD, VIJAYAWADA 4. PINAPATI BABU RAO, S/O.LATE SAMADANAM, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.14-42-38, VELIVOLUVARI STREET, MORISPET, TENALI,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 set aside the orders dated 16.09.2025 passed by Hon'ble Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division) Tenali I.A.NO.582/2025 in O.S.No.41/2022 and implead the Petitioners as proper and necessary parties for the affective adjudication of the case. 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 pleased to stay all further proceedings in O.S.No.41/2022 on the file of the principal civil judge (senior division) at tenali pending disposal of this Civil Revision Petition in the interests of justice or else irreparable loss will be caused to the revision petitioners/petitioners/plaintiffs and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P A SESHU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. HABIBULLA SHAIK 3 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2916 of 2025 The Court made the following Order: The respondents 1 to 3 herein had filed O.S.No.41 of 2022, against the 4th respondent herein before the learned Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tenali, for a declaration that the items in the suit schedule property, namely the RCC Roof building in 208.88 Sq.yds of land bearing D.No.14-42- 38, situated in Tenali Municipal Corporation and an extent of 135 Sq.yds of vacant site, bearing D.No.14-42-38, are the properties which devolved solely on respondents 1 to 3. The documents for this case for all the said properties are admittedly the properties of late Sri Sarath Chandar. He had passed away on 09.05.2018 and all the said properties had devolved upon the respondents 1 to 3. However, the 4th respondent, who is the father of deceased Sri Sarath Chandar, on the basis of previous transactions relating to this property, claimed to be the owner of the property and was refusing to acknowledge the title of respondents 1 to 3 over the said property. 2. During the pendency of this suit, the petitioners herein, who are the sisters of late Sri Sarath Chandar, had sought to implead themselves, by way of I.A.No.582 of 2025 in the said suit. The contention of the petitioners was that late Sri Sarath Chandar had executed a will in favour of the petitioners on 03.05.2018 and that the said property devolved upon them by virtue of this will. The Trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the petitioners are not necessary or appropriate parties and that they should file a separate suit based on the will executed in their favour. 4 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2916 of 2025 3. This order of rejection, dated 16.09.2025, is challenged before this Court, by way of the present Revision Petition. 4. Though the view of the Trial Court relates to the extent of whether separate suits should be filed or not, which is an issue which would require further consideration, it would be appropriate for this Court to allow this Civil Revision Petition. 5. The reason for such a view is that the claims of the petitioners and more specifically, the validity and genuineness of the will claimed by the petitioners would remain as a cloud over the property. Rejecting the prayer of the petitioners to implead themselves in the said suit would only lead to multiplicity of proceedings and the cloud over the property would remain for further time. 6. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to allow this Civil Revision Petition, setting aside the order of the Trial Court, dated 16.09.2025 and permit the petitioners to implead themselves as defendants in the suit. 7. It is made clear that this order, permitting the petitioners to implead themselves, shall not be treated as any acknowledgement or recognition of the right or claim of the property by the petitioners. It is further made clear that the question of how the claims of the petitioners, relating to the will said to have been executed by their late brother is to be treated by the Trial Court, which is also left open. 5 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2916 of 2025 8. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J 02.01.2026 MJA 6 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2916 of 2025 193 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2916/2025 02.01.2026 MJA