The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Civil Revision Petition No.3401 of 2011 Date: 23-12-2011 Between: Dantala Praveen ..... Petitioner AND 1.Biaraboina Ramulu and 9 others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.K.Narasimhachari Counsel for respondent No.10: Mr.J.Ashvini Kumar Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 9: ----- The Court made the following : Order: The petitioner, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.12 of 2010 on the file of the Court of the learned II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet, filed this Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India complaining of inaction on the part of the learned II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet, in the timely disposal of the IAs filed for restoration of the suit and to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased defendant No.1. The petitioner also felt aggrieved by return of the application for impleading respondent No.10 herein as defendant No.10 in the suit. I have heard Sri K.Narasimhachari, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri J.Ashvini Kumar, learned Counsel for respondent No.10. As respondent Nos.2 to 9 are proforma parties, no notice was ordered to be issued to them. Originally, the petitioner has filed the aforementioned suit for recovery of certain money against defendant No.1 alone. Pending the suit, he filed IA.No.751 of 2010 for attachment before judgment of the property of the sole defendant. By Order, dated 02-07-2010, the property was attached and the IA was adjourned to 16-08-2010, on which date, the Counsel for the defendant has filed a memo stating that the defendant has died on 07-08-2010. Hence, the case was adjourned to 30-08-2010 to enable the petitioner to take steps for bringing the legal representatives of the sole defendant on record and as the petitioner and his Counsel were absent on that day, the case was again adjourned to 14-09-2010. The petitioner pleaded that as he did not get full particulars of the legal representatives of the deceased defendant, he could not file the application for bringing them on record. The suit was dismissed on 14-09-2010 for the failure of the petitioner to take steps to bring the legal representatives of the deceased defendant on record. On 06-11-2010, the petitioner filed IA (SR) No.3424 of 2010 for restoration of the suit, along with IA.No.1438 of 2010 seeking condonation of delay of 26 days in filing the said application. The said application is stated to be pending from 06-11-2010. The petitioner also filed an application to bring on record, the legal representatives of the sole defendant, which is also kept pending. In the meantime, the legal representatives of the deceased defendant, whose impleadment is sought by the petitioner, alienated the property in question to respondent No.10 herein on 26-12-2010. Therefore, the petitioner filed the application to bring on record respondent No.10 herein as defendant No.10 in the suit, but the same was returned. The petitioner filed another application for directing the sub-Registrar, Suryapet, not to entertain any application for transfer/alienation of petition schedule property by respondent No.10 herein to third parties. The said application was returned on 19-04-2011. The above facts would reveal that the learned II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet, has been keeping several Interlocutory Applications pending from 06- 11-2010. This, obviously, lead to the legal representatives of the deceased defendant, who are proposed to be impleaded as defendant Nos.2 to 9, selling the property to respondent No.10, for whose impleadment also an application has been filed, but the same has been returned. Therefore, the learned II Additional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet, is directed to, expeditiously, dispose of all the above-mentioned applications in a time bound manner with the outer limit of two months for the date of receipt of this order. Subject to the above-direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. Interim order of injunction, dated 20-08-2011, granted by this Court shall last till disposal of the interlocutory applications by the Court below. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 23rd December, 2011 LUR