Case Note & Summary
The provided judgment excerpt pertains to three civil revision petitions, CRP Nos. 2075, 2076 and 2077 of 2022, filed before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners, family members of Gogulapalli Khadar Mohiddin and others, challenged orders dated 07-07-2022 passed in I.A. Nos. 16 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi, Prakasam District. The first petitioner and some respondents were shown as died, and interlocutory applications were filed in 2024 under Section 151 CPC seeking condonation of delay of 352 days and 351 days in filing petitions to bring legal representatives, setting aside abatement caused by death of the sole respondent and the 4th petitioner, and bringing proposed legal representatives on record in the main revision petitions and all interlocutory applications. The counsel for the petitioners was Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, while no counsel appeared for respondents. The judgment text provided did not include the substantive reasoning, analysis, or final operative order of the court. Therefore, the factual background of the original suit and the precise legal findings remain Not mentioned in the available excerpt. The material available indicates that the High Court was seized of procedural applications concerning abatement and substitution of legal representatives arising from the interlocutory orders of the trial court. The cited cases in the head note were AIR 1983 SC 355, AIR 1985 SC 606 and AIR 1987 SC 1353. The procedural history shows that after the trial court passed the impugned orders on 07-07-2022, the revision petitions were filed, and subsequently in 2024 multiple IAs were filed for condonation of delay, setting aside abatement and bringing legal representatives on record. The High Court listed these revisions for a common order pronounced on 21-01-2026. Because the excerpt does not contain the judgment's reasoning or decision, the outcome and ratio decidendi cannot be faithfully extracted.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the orders dated 07-07-2022 in I.A. Nos. 16 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi were liable to be set aside under Article 227 of the Constitution of India; whether delays in filing petitions to bring legal representatives should be condoned; whether abatement caused by death of parties should be set aside and legal representatives brought on record under Section 151 CPC.
Case Details
Civil Revision Petition Nos. 2075, 2076 and 2077 of 2022
Gogulapalli Khadar Mohiddin (died), Gogulapalli Khar Basha (died), Gogulapalli @ Shaik Rasool Bee and Others
Gogulapalli Khadar (died), Gogulapalli Petha Nazeer, Gogulapalli Chinna Nazeer Basha, Shaik Khadar Uneesa, Shaik Fathima
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil revision petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging interlocutory orders dated 07-07-2022 in I.A. Nos. 16 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi, Prakasam District.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to set aside the orders dated 07-07-2022 passed in the interlocutory applications, condone delays in filing petitions to bring legal representatives, set aside abatement caused by death of parties, and bring proposed legal representatives on record.
Filing Reason
The petitioners were aggrieved by the orders dated 07-07-2022 in I.A. Nos. 16 of 2021 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi.
Previous Decisions
The Senior Civil Judge, Darsi passed orders dated 07-07-2022 in I.A. Nos. 16 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009, which were challenged in the civil revision petitions.
Issues
Whether the orders dated 07-07-2022 in I.A. Nos. 16 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Darsi were liable to be set aside under Article 227 of Constitution of India.
Whether the delay of 352 days and 351 days in filing petitions to bring legal representatives of deceased 4th petitioner should be condoned.
Whether the abatement caused due to death of sole respondent and 4th petitioner should be set aside under Section 151 CPC.
Whether proposed legal representatives should be brought on record in the revision petitions and interlocutory applications.
Judgment Excerpts
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 toaggrieved by order dated 07-07-2022 in 1.A. Nos. 16 of 2021 in O.S.No. 58/2009 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi, Prakasam District
IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 condone the delay of 352 days in filing the present Petition to bring the Legal Representatives of deceased 4th Petitioner and pass
Procedural History
The petitioners filed Civil Revision Petition Nos. 2075, 2076 and 2077 of 2022 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, challenging orders dated 07-07-2022 passed in I.A. Nos. 16 and 17 of 2021 in O.S. No. 58/2009 by the Senior Civil Judge, Darsi, Prakasam District. In 2024, interlocutory applications were filed under Section 151 CPC in each revision petition seeking condonation of delay in bringing legal representatives, setting aside abatement caused by death of parties, and bringing proposed legal representatives on record. The matters were listed for a common order and heard on 21-01-2026. No counsel appeared for the respondents.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 151
