MOTHUKURI RANGA RAO Vs. ROYYALA LAXMINARAYANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS review petition is filed under Section 114 C. P. C. to review the order, dated 23. 12. 2005 passed by this Court in CRP No. 6929 of 2005.

(2.) BEFORE going into the issue whether the order passed by this Court can be reviewed or not and the legal position thereof, it is necessary to refer to the facts involved in this revision. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in CRP No. 6929 of 2005.

(3.) THE petitioner, Royyala Laxmi narayana, filed an application under Section 32 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area)Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. 1950 (for brevity "the Tenancy Act") for declaration that he is in undisputed possession of the petition schedule property and also for restoration of possession of the lands in question. The Mandal Revenue Officer, before whom the application was filed, conducted a detailed enquiry, and by his order dated 30. 3. 1998, dismissed the application. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Joint Collector, warangal, under Section 90 of the Tenancy act, along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, to condone the delay of about 153 days in filing the appeal. The Joint Collector dismissed the application on the ground that the delay was not properly explained. Questioning the order, dated 7. 6. 1999, the petitioner filed CRP No. 6929 of 2005 along with an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 2081 days in filing the revision. When the petition to condone the delay came up for hearing, this Court ordered notice to the respondents, and the respondents 1, 2, 5 and 6, though received notices, did not put in their appearance either in person or through an advocate. So far as respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned they refused to receive the notice. Then, this Court heard Sri Hari Sreedhar, learned counsel for the petitioner.