Kamal Kumar Agarwal v. Narpat Singh
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: RENUKA YARA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2025-12-19. Kamal Kumar Agarwal v. Narpat Singh. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA // AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2088 OF 2025 Petition under Article 227 of lh,e Constitution of lndia. Aggrieved by the order dated 10-03 2025 passed in l A No 483/2025 rn O S. No 2805 of 202O on the file of Vll Junior Civil Judge, City Crvil Court, Hyderabad Between: Kanral Kumar Agarwal, S/o Late Prem Kumar Agarwal, Aged 51 Years. Occ Busrness, R/o (i) Door No. 3 5 45. Ramkoti Hyderabad, temporarily residing at (r) Ground & 1'r Floors, Plot No. 146/8, Prashasan Nagar Cooperative Building Socrety, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 500 033. ... Petitioner/RespondenUDefendant AND Narpat Singh, S/o Umed Singh, Aged 68 years, Occ. Retired, R/o H. No. 8' 22SBl82tPN, Plot No. 146/3, Prashasan Nagar Cooperative Building Society, Jubrlee Hills, Hyderabad-500 033 .
RespondenUPetitioner/Plaintiff lA NO:'f OF 2025 '1 Petition under Section 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all proceedings in O. S. No. 2805 of 2020 on the file of Vll Junror Civil Judge, Crty Civrl Court, Hyderabad, pendrng disposal of the main revision Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Abdul Azam Khan, Advocate representing to Mr. L RAM SINGH, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. ROHIT POGULA, Advocate The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF T-J -ANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA'ARA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2088 oi lO25 19th DAY OF DECEMBER 202s Bet\\ ee 11: Mr. l(arnal Krrnr:Lr {grrru al, LJr derarbircl peLrtroner AND Mr. Narrpat Sinqlr, Hr clerabari r'3sl)on dent ORDER: Hcarcl NIr Abrlr-rl Azam l(harn, learned coun. ;, 1 rcpresenting Mr. L. R:Lrn sirrg,h. Iclrnted colrnsel:rppcaring for th, and ltetitioner Mr.
ltrlrit PorlLrla. lL,nrrred c'outrscl lor the respond( rt. P,lrused the record 2. Tl'rrs Crr il Rt:r'isiorr Petition is <l ltrelerred aggrir:'. bv thc order dated 10. 03. 2025 passed in [. A. No . 183 of 2024 lt (). S No. 2805 of 2O2t) br- thc lcarnccl VII Jrrnior Civil Judge, (' ... ' Civil Court, Hyderal;ad, u,herein, a petition filed under Order v Rule 17 read vt,ith I 5I ol the CI)C, has ltecn arliowed permrl t rLg r. espondent (ptaintiff) to carr] olrt amendment u,ith respect r( c. rl,lulation of lt IJ crp quantum of )()88 2O2S arrears, illtercst and future rents The said amendment has been aliou'ed. Aggrieved by the same, thc prcsent civil R"',ision Petition is preferred 3. I-earned counsel lor lhe rer. ision petilrunet. challer_rgecl the impugned order on the solc ground that thc trial has comnrenced ar-rd lherefore, no amcndment is to be permitted as per thc proviso lrr-rder Order VI Rule 17 ol thc CpC. 1.
Whereas, I according to the lear-ncd counsel for the respot_rdent i (plaintiffl) as pcr the same provisror-r, arnendment can be carrieci or-rt i at an],stage of the procecclings provicleci the same does not cl_range the nature of the surt I t t i 5 . [n the instar-rl case, I permrtting the amendmr:nt does not caltse I l an1' prejuclice as the 1l,rlurc of the suit cloes not change At besr the amendment pcrmits tl-re lancllord to claim tlle exact quantum of l arrears of rents and exact i amount of interest on arrears of rent As I' l such, this Court sees no reason to rnterfere w. ith the impugned i I order passed by the trial Court t I I I 6. I In the result, the Cir. il Revision petition I is dismissed I j confirming the order dated I i0. 03. 2O25 passed in I. A. No. 4g3 of 2024 in O. S. No. 2BO5 of 2O2O by the learned VII Junior Civil . E? :t:s t? Y,J ')068 2025 There shal1 bc lo order as to Judge, City Civil Courr. HYderabad costs r :nd closed.
N{iscellaneous Pctitions' il any pending, sha1l I]D/- A. JAYASREE ASSI ;IAt\lT REGISTRAR t-r //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Vll Junior Crvrl Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabac 2. One CC to l\. 4r. Abdul Azam Khan, Advocate repre:r ntinE to lt4r. L RAU SINGH, Advocate IOPUC] 3. One CC to SRI. ROHIT POGULA Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies 6 RCiPSL t HIGH COURT DATED: 1911212025 =-a\ ,r"S'-ieii^' cc)r ( 'r'''. \ t]I i'1Aq 2026 ) I a. \r.. * ORDER CRP. No. 2088 of 2025 Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is Dismissed lo 2t
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.