Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2782 (AP)

KONDAPAVULURI BENOD KUMAR v. KONDAPAVULURI KEERTHI SWAROOPA RANI

CRP/1566/2026 · 2026-06-03

Subba Reddy Satti

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010280852026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI I.A.No.3 of 2026 IN/And CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1566/2026 Between: Kondapavuluri Benod Kumar and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Kondapavuluri Keerthi Swaroopa Rani and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. ANIL KUMAR DASARI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. DEVALARAJU ANIL KUMAR The Court made the following order: The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the inaction of the Trial Court in numbering the suit filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs on 12.02.2026, for partition. 2 2. The petitioners herein are the plaintiffs and the respondents herein are the defendants in the unnumbered suit. 3. The petitioners filed a suit for partition on 12.02.2026, which was assigned G.L.No.869 of 2026. It is the case of the petitioners/plaintiffs that the plaint was returned by the office of the Metropolitan District & Sessions Judge with certain objections, which were duly complied with and, thereafter, the plaint was re-presented. According to the petitioners, after hearing the learned counsel, the learned Trial Court posted the matter to 15.06.2026 for orders. 4. Heard Sri D. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs and Sri Devalaraju Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents/defendants. 5. Sri D. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs, submits that despite presentation of the suit on 12.02.2026 by complying with all office objections, the suit has not been numbered till date. He would further contend that taking advantage, the respondents are attempting to alienate the schedule properties, thereby causing serious prejudice to the petitioners. Learned counsel appearing for respondents would submit that as seen from the copy of ‘A’ dairy filed along with the CRP, the learned trial court posted the unnumbered suit to 15.06.2026 for orders. 6. It is brought to the notice of this Court that a Coordinate Bench, while entertaining the present revision petition, granted an interim order restraining the respondents from alienating the 3 properties covered under Schedule ‘A’, Schedule 'B' and Schedule 'C' appended to the unnumbered suit (O.S. No. ___ of 2026), presented on 12.02.2026, till the next date of hearing. 7. As seen from the record, the Trial Court, having heard learned counsel for the petitioners/plaintiffs, adjourned the unnumbered suit to 15.06.2026 for orders. The suit itself is yet to be numbered, and in fact, the learned trial court heard the advocate and posted the unnumbered suit to 15.06.2026. 8. In the considered opinion of this Court, granting an interim relief in respect of the subject properties in an unnumbered suit while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is impermissible. 9. Given the facts and circumstances, the above Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, directing the Trial Court to pass appropriate orders regarding the numbering of the suit strictly in accordance with law by 15.06.2026 or within one week thereafter. 10. The interim order granted earlier in I.A.No.2 of 2026 stands vacated. Accordingly, I.A.No.3 of 2026 is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, any pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _____________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI,J Date: 04.06.2026 ANS 4 31 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1566/2026 Date: 04.06.2026 ANS