IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH. TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 700 OF 2023

Between:

• 1. K. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, S/o K. Chinna Rami Reddy, Aged about 54 years, Residing at D.No. 1-23, Pedda Kannaki Village and Post, Thottambedu Mandal, Tirupati District.
• 2. P. Muni Reddy, S/o P. Chandrasekhar Reddy, Aged about 37 years. Residing at D.No. 3-21/A, Anasampalli Village, Renigunta Mandal, Tirupati District.
• 3. P. Purushotham Reddy, S/o P. Chandrasekhar Reddy, Aged about 35 years, Residing at D.No. 3-21/A, Anasampalli Village, Renigunta Mandal, Tirupati District.

...Revision Petitioners/Respondents/Defendants AND

P.Jayalakshmi @ S.Jaya Lakshmi Devi, W/o P.Padmakar, Aged about 47 years, Residing at D.No.18-2-243/1A, Abbanna Colony, Tirupati, Tirupati District.

...Respondent/Petitioner/Plaintiff

$\mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{Z}^2\times\mathbb{Z}^2}$

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the Order dt:24.02.2023 made in I.A.No.382 of 2022 in O.S.No.101 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District.

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the civil revision petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings in O.S.No.101 of 2022 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District, pending disposal of CRP.No.700 of 2023, on the file of the High Court.

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri O.Udaya Kumar, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri Venkatesh, learned counsel representing VMR LEGAL for the Respondent, the Court made the following;

ORDER:

"Heard Sir O.Udaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Venkatesh, learned counsel representing VMR legal.

Learned counsel for the respondent requested time to place the F.I.R copies, which are very much required for adjudication of this case and sought time.

To the above said submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order impugned is erroneous whereby the Court has appointed Advocate Commissioner. In the meantime, if the executes the warrant, the purpose of filing the Revision would be defeated and the said order is allowed to continue it amounts to miscarriage of justice.

Taking into consideration the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the grounds raised in the Revision, prima facie, this Court finds that there is point for consideration in the Revision Petition and in the meantime, if the orders in I.A.No.382 of 2022 dated 24.02.2023, is implemented, the purpose of filing this Revision Petition will be defeated and the petitioner will be adversely affected.

As such, this Court is inclined to grant the following interim order:

"There shall be an interim stay of operation of orders passed in I.A.No.382 of 2022, for a period of eight (08) weeks."

Post on 04.04.2023."

Sd/- S. SRINIVASA PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

$25$

//TRUE COPY//

For.

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1. The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District

• 2. P.Jayalakshmi @ S.Jaya Lakshmi Devi, W/o P.Padmakar, Residing at D.No.18-2-243/1A, Abbanna Colony, Tirupati, Tirupati District. (by RPAD)
• 3. One CC to Sri. O.Udaya Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]
• 4. One CC to VMR Legal Advocate [OPUC]
• 5. One spare copy

$MM$

HIGH COURT

RCJ

DATED: 21 /03/2023

NOTE: POST ON 04.04.2023

ORDER

CRP.No.700 of 2023

INTERIM STAY