HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY C.R.P.Nos.3710 & 3714 of 2013 Date : 7-8-2014 C.R.P.No.3710 of 2013 Between :
K. Swapna ..
Petitioner And T.K. Sanjay ..
Respondent Counsel for petitioner : P. Gopala Krishna Counsel for respondent : Sri K. Mohan The Court made the following:
COMMON ORDER:
C.R.P.No.3710 of 2013 is filed against order dated 26- 6-2013 in I.A.No.1730 of 2012 in I.A.No.3057 of 2011 in O.S.No.760 of 2011 on the file of the learned III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District. C.R.P.No.3714 of 2013 is filed against order dated 26-6-2013 in I.A.No.1731 of 2012 in I.A.No.3058 of 2011 in O.S.No.760 of 2011 on the file of the said Court.
By the above mentioned orders, the lower Court has allowed the applications filed by the respondent/defendant for amendment of the counter-affidavits in I.A.Nos.3057/2011 and 3058/2011 by deleting the words “as a tenant paying a monthly rent of about Rs.4,500/-” in para-5 thereof, by imposing costs of Rs.300/- in each application.
At the hearing, Sri K. Mohan, learned counsel for the respondent, has stated that the counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff in the lower Court has received the said costs. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He has however stated that the costs were received under a mistake by his counter-part.
In my opinion, once the costs are received by its counsel, a party is barred from questioning the order (See:
Smt. D. Manemma Vs. V. Anantha Reddy (died) per L.Rs.
[1]
V. Sudershan Reddy and others ). Hence, the Civil Revision Petitions cannot be entertained and the same are accordingly dismissed.
As a sequel to the dismissal of the Civil Revision Petitions, CRPMP Nos.4955 of 2013 and 2979 of 2014 in C.R.P.No.3710 of 2013 and CRPMP Nos.4959 of 2013 and 2957 of 2014 in C.R.P.No.3714 of 2013 are disposed of as infructuous.
Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 7-8-2014 AM
[1] 2013(2) ALT 332