THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1738 OF 2014 DATED 05TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 Between:
Gandrati Ram Narayana … Petitioner and Thoutireddy Raji Reddy and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.1738 OF 2014 O R D E R This CRP arises out of the order dated 05-06-2014 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Warangal, in I.A.No.320 of 2014 in I.A.No.1099 of 2013 in I.A.No.652 of 2013 in O.S.No.93 of 2013. The petitioner herein is the first defendant in the said suit, O.S. No.93 of 2013. The plaintiff in the said suit filed I.A.No.1099 of 2013 for examination of certain documents by a handwriting expert. The petitioner/first defendant was set ex parte in the said I.A. by order dated 23-01-2014. He thereupon filed I.A.No.320 of 2014 therein to set aside the ex parte order dated 23-01-2014. By its order dated 05-06-2014, the Court below dismissed the I.A. The reason for such dismissal was that the affidavit in support of the I.A. was filed by an advocate who did not hold a vakalat for the party.
This Court, by order dated 19-06-2014, granted interim stay of further proceedings in the suit. Though the second respondent herein, being the second defendant in the suit, was shown as an unnecessary party to this petition, he entered appearance through Sri Deepak Misra, learned counsel. The first respondent herein, being the plaintiff in the suit, despite service of notice, did not enter appearance through counsel or in person.
Though this Court finds no error in the order passed by the Court below in so far as the established technical irregularity is concerned, it is necessary in the interest of justice that the first defendant in the suit be given an opportunity to contest I.A.No.1099 of 2013 as it is his signatures which are sought to be sent for examination by a handwriting expert.
Further, as rightly pointed out by Sri Deepak Misra, learned counsel, the second defendant in the suit is 80 years of age and delay in the suit proceedings would invariably cause harm and injustice to him.
It is therefore left open to the petitioner/first defendant to file a proper application before the Court below for setting aside the ex parte order dated 23-01-2014. In the event such an application is filed, the Court below shall entertain the same notwithstanding the dismissal of the earlier application in I.A.No.320 of 2014 and consider the same on its merits.
The CRP is allowed to the extent stated above. The interim stay granted by this Court is vacated. The Court below shall keep in mind the Circular instructions issued by this Court as to disposal of matters relating to senior citizens. No order as to costs.
SANJAY KUMAR, J 05TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 Svv