Crp/2028/2018 Of A Siva Reddy v. Income Tax Recovery Officer-Ii

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD - FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY CIVIL REVIS ON PETITION NO: 2028 OF 20'18 Petition under Article 227 oI the Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the orderdated 07.02.2018 in I.A.No.1254 of 2017 in O.S.No.666 of 2011, on the file of theCourt of the X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.Court of the X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Between: A. Siva Reddy, S/o.A.T. Veera Reddy, aged about 60 years, Occ: Business,R/o H No 21-22-24, NS.Nagar, Adoni, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh. ,..PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF AND 1lncome Tax Recovery Officer-ll, Company Range-ll, lV Floor, New Block,Room No.404, 121, N.H. Road, Chennai-600034.Room No.404, 121, N.H. Road, Chennai-600034. 2Union of lndia Secretary Department of Revenue, Ir/inistry of Finance,New Delhi.New Delhi. 3. lGGl Resorts lnternational Limited, No.T-18-A, Alsa Mal Complex, 149 lVlontiethRoad, Egmor, Chennai-600008 represented by its Managing DirectorRoad, Egmor, Chennai-600008 represented by its Managing Director 4, M/s. Life Style Constructions, A partnership firm, having its office at H.No.6-2-42,A.C.Guards, Hyderabad represented by its Managing Partner, G.SrinivasaReddyA.C.Guards, Hyderabad represented by its Managing Partner, G.SrinivasaReddy ...RESPONDENT'S/DEFENDANT'S lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated inthe affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the ordersthe affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the orderspassed in 1.A.No.1254 of 2017 in O.S.No.666 of 2O11 daled 071021201 8 on the fileof the court of the X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.of the court of the X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. For the Petitioner: SMT. SUNITHA MONDAL, Advocate for SRI A. P. REDDY For the Respondent No.1: SRI VENKAT RAM REDDY, Advocate forSRI K. RAJI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI K. VASANTHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 4: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE [B. ] CIVIL REVISION PETITION No'2O2a [of ][2O18] 98D.EB: This revision is filed challenging the order [dated 07.02.2018 ][in]I.A.No.1254 of 2Ol7 in O.S.No.666 of 2011 [passed ][by ][the]X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, [rtrhereunder ][an]applicatron filed seeking condonation of [delay ][ln filing ][the ][petition ][to]i-esiore the suit was dismissed. 2. The petitioner/plaintiff instituted a suit [in ][O.S.No.666 ][of]2011 for declaration and injunction under Section [281 ][read ][with ][Rule]11(6) of the Second Schedule of Income [Tax ][Act, ][1961, against ][the]respondents herein. The suit was dismissed [was ][default ][on 26.10.2017]for non-appearance of the [plaintiff ]and his counsel. [An ][application ][ln]I.A.No.1254 of 2O1,7 was filed seeking to condone [the ][delay ][of ][three]days in filing a restoration [petition ]under Order iX [Rule ][9 ] [and for]setting aside dismissal order dated 26.tO.20t7. 3. Mr. Sunitha Mondal, learned counsel representing Mr. [A.P']Reddy, learned counsel for the [petitioner, ]submitted [that ][there ][was]death in the family of the petitio ner/pla intiff . It [was ][stated ][in ][the]affidavit filed in support of the condone delay [petition ][that ][his ][famlly]member, Mr, G, Kuber Reddy, died on 25.10.2017 [and ][as ][instructed]by the pelitioner/plaintiff, the advocate appearing [on his ][behalf ][filed]an adjournment petition on 26.10.2017. [However, ][the ][learned ][trial]ludqe did not consider the same and dismissed the [suit for ][default.] 3. Mr. Sunitha Mondal, learned counsel representing Mr. [A.P']Reddy, learned counsel for the [petitioner, ]submitted [that ][there ][was]death in the family of the petitio ner/pla intiff . It [was ][stated ][in ][the]affidavit filed in support of the condone delay [petition ][that ][his ][famlly]member, Mr, G, Kuber Reddy, died on 25.10.2017 [and ][as ][instructed]by the pelitioner/plaintiff, the advocate appearing [on his ][behalf ][filed]an adjournment petition on 26.10.2017. [However, ][the ][learned ][trial]ludqe did not consider the same and dismissed the [suit for ][default.] 4. As it appears from the record, there is [no ][counter ][filed by ][the]respondents before the Court below. Even in this revision, [there ][is ][no]appearance on behalf of the respondents No.2 [and ][4. ][Mr. ][Venkat ][Ram] Reddy, learned counsel representing lv1r. K. Raji Reddy, learnedstanding counsel for the respondent No.1, submitted that orders maybe passed on merits. N4r. K. Vasantha Rao, learned counsel for therespondent No.3, stated that the petitioner was not diligent inpursuing the suit before the Court below. However, the learnedcounsel does not dispute the fact that the application for adjournmentof the case was filed by the petitioner/pla intiff on 26.t0.2017. 5. Though conditional order was passed by the Court belowdirecting the plaintiff to proceed with trial on 26.L0.2011, it is a matterof record that the petitioner/plaintiff, through his advocate, filed aseparate application on 26.70.20L7 for adjournment of the case citingreason of death of one of his family member. In such circumstances,the Court below should have taken a lenient view in condoning thedelay of three days in filling the restoration petition. This Court is oflhe opinion that non-appearance of the pet tioner/plaintiff was notdeliberate, in view of the fact that there was a death in the familv. In view of the above, the civil revision petition is allowed subjectto payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-, out of which, Rs.2,500/- to beremitted to the Legal Services Authority, Ranga Reddy District andRs.2,500/- to be remitted to the Advocates Bar Association, RangaReddy District. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. SD/- K, SAILESHIASSISTANT REGISTRARt-aSECTION OFFICER ,TRUE COPY' To,1.The X Additional Chief [Judge, City Civil Court, ][Hyderabad]1.The X Additional Chief [Judge, City Civil Court, ][Hyderabad] One CC to Sri A. P. [Reddy, ][Advocate ] 2. One CC to Sri K. Vasantha [Rao, ][Advocate ] aJ,J, [b* [l--] One CC to Sri K. Raji [Reddy, ][Advocate ] 4. EThe Legal Services Authority, [Ranga Reddy ][District.] I 6. The Advocates Bar Association, Ranga Reddy District. 7. The lncome Tax Recovery Officer-ll, Company Range-ll, IV Floor, New Block,Room No.404, 121 , N.H. Road, Chennai-OOOCiSa.Room No.404, 121 , N.H. Road, Chennai-OOOCiSa. B The secretary, Department of Revenue, Union of rndia, Ministry of Finance, NewDelhi.Delhi.9. Two CD Copies '10. One Spare Copygbrgbr i HIGH COURT DATED: 0610812021 ORDERCRP.No.2028 of 2018 ALLOWING THE CRP ))SlAIE1(:)wo1t [sEP$tl]c.rs*<i, )))nl -lt