HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3949 OF 2011 DATE:23-09-2011 BETWEEN Kolleti Ranga Rao (died) per L.Rs. And others …Petitioners AND Namburi Seetharama Raju and another …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3949 OF 2011 ORDER: Petitioners, who were impleaded as party respondents in I.A.No.59 of 2011 in A.T.C.No.24 of 1987 filed this revision questioning their impleadment to the ATC. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the lower Court erroneously recorded the finding that the counsel for the petitioners reported no objection to allow the impugned petition. In fact, the petitioners have filed a counter contending that there are other legal heirs apart from the petitioners herein who are not shown as proposed parties in the petition and therefore, the petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties and liable to be dismissed. Admittedly, the above A.T.C. was filed for eviction of Kolleti Ranga Rao, who was the tenant and on his death, the impugned I.A. was filed stating that the petitioners herein-impleaded parties inherited the estate of the deceased Kolleti Ranga Rao being his legal heirs. Once the tenant died, whoever inherited the tenancy rights are proper parties and therefore, no infirmity is discernable with the impugned order passed by the lower Court warranting interference by this Court. However, the petitioners can raise all the objection such as non-impleadment of other legal heirs i.e. daughters of late tenant and the A.T.C. is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of the necessary parties and as and when said objection is raised, it is for the Court below to consider the same and pass appropriate orders. With the above observation, the revision is dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. SEPTEMBER 23, 2011 Tsr.