M Ramadevi vs P Govinda Satyanarayan on 10 October, 2022
Learned counsel for the respondents also
cited a judgment in Dasari Ramachandra Rao v. Koripalli
Venkata Rao3. In that case this Court was engaged in a
decision during the execution proceedings and was to state
about powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and
powers under Section 115 C.P.C. It is stated therein that this
Court could interfere with if there is manifest injustice in the
order of the trial Court or when the power was exercised
2
(2020) 5 ALD 58/2020 SCC Online AP 591
3
2021 SCC Online AP 37/(2021) 1 ALT 616 (AP)
18
Dr. VRKS, J
C.R.P.No.551 of 2019
capriciously. All these rulings which speak about the wide
power of this Court while exercising revisional jurisdiction
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In substance,
they indicate that there is power to rectify miscarriage of justice.
In the considered opinion of this Court, failure to concede to the
prayer on part of the trial Court is undoubtedly created
miscarriage of justice as it left the humans to grave risk, while
the property in dispute was before the trial Court. Nobody
needs to ordain the trial Court to be pragmatic and to be
considerate to the human agonies which get escalated since the
disputed questions of facts or law raised in the suit could not be
decided in a Jiffy. For all these reasons this Court holds that
the impugned order resulted in gross failure of justice and
therefore, the same is to be set aside. The point is answered in
favour of the revision petitioner.