Telangana High Court
CRP/3262/2023 of Bathini Sridevi Vs Singireddy Srinivas Reddy on 29 December 2023
, :t, IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAATHYDERABAD -""' FRIDAY THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTwo rHouSANo nruo rwer.rry ftrnEE'"- . [ 3166 l PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR CIVIL REVISI NPETITIO N :3262 F 2023 Between: lA NO: 2 oF 2023 Counset for the
l: ;,f-', [, ]:t,
[ [3166 ]l
IN THE HIGH COURT ATHYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA-""'
FRIDAY THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER.Two rHouSANo nruo rwer.rry ftrnEE'"- PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
CIVIL REVISINPETITION:3262F 2023
petition Under A..icre 227-ot rhe constitution of rndia against the order dated :f;L{;fi .fr #l'"il.,.ffl [llr;::rilrm:-m#,,,,1i,:i#;Jl[ffi,H,,g;,,,rr-]
Between:
1Anusha Village Bathini Athmakur Mandal Sridevi, Aparrments Chikori W/o. Bathini. vacaori Gardens Srinivas Goud ehongii-OiririJ pr"r""rtfy Ryo. H No. 1_66 R:/o. pullayagudemFtat No. 303,2Mothkur Bathini Srinivas Goud. Vi,ase And Mandat S/o. . yadadriEn"*; Somaiatr Bdr;il';iyd;;r;."Oci fir,"i*.., [.*y". ]H No. 4_166303 An usha Apartmenrs chikoti carJens oi]iri'"iL"r.urun,y R/o. Ftat No.e;rti'p",ili lide'ra bra.303 An usha Apartmenrs chikoti carJens oi]iri'"iL"r.urun,y R/o. Ftat No.e;rti'p",ili lide'ra bra.
,:-.4
...petitioner/Defendants Nos.i & 2
AND
Singireddy Srinivas Reddy. S/o. S. Jayender Reddy, Occ. Business, Ryo. g wo. f.l,'"'J,'#lril,I"ff ''riJ.5x?'rlli;;,.9:".ily;*;re'i"Js"n.or-e;,;,i'G;;s;l,'"'J,'#lril,I"ff ''riJ.5x?'rlli;;,.9:".ily;*;re'i"Js"n.or-e;,;,i'G;;s;
...RespondenUplaintiff
lA NO: 2 oF 2023
cum the proceedinss in o.S.No.2722tzozz on the affidavit Vt petition under section Addt. fired Metropotitan in support or^ttre^ r51 Magistrate, cpc p-etrti5n, praying in" ni"iri til"rr [r;;"t it J figh that in ir,ilftalgiri dourt the circumstances stated aoor. Junior ."v District, Uppat, be preased civil to Judge stay atin $i&:srffii:; rr6:*dti,.. rr: iijl.: _. ,llL.B.Nagar until disposal of the main C.R.p.
Counset for the petitioner(s):SRl. DR. KADIRI KRISHNATAH
Counsel for the Respondent: Sri pOTTlcARt SRIDHAR REODY
{}.[:r,t ]-i.lfE [.r.-i'][.,'..t.].ffi;,i.;!1.. ", The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMARCivil Revisiontition No.3262of 2O23
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This Revision Petition is preferred against the non-disposal of
I.A.No.186 of 2022 in O.S.No.2722 of 2022 pending on the file of the IIAdditional Junior civil Judge-cum-Vl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate,Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Uppal at L.B.Nagar.
2. Petitioners herein are the defendants in the suit and respondents inthe interlocutory application. The aforesaid suit was filed theby respondent herein seeking declaration of tifle, recovery of possession andperpetual injunction restraining the defendants and their suppofters fromcausing interference with the possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffover the suit schedule property.
3. The Court below, by order dt.23.12.2022, while ordering notice tothe respondents-defendants, had granted an ad interim injunctionrestraining the respondents-defendants from alienating the petitionschedule property under the guise of plot No.151/A & 151/8 in Sy.No.33/2of Chengicherla Village.
4. The revision petitioners contend that on receiving the summons inthe suit, the petitioners had filed a counter in the interlocutory applicationand written statement in the suit.
5. Petitioners further contend that though they had [filed counter ][in]the interlocutory application, vZe I.A.No.186 of 2022, on [21.07.2023, the]said interlocutory application has not been disposed of [yet, ][and ][on ][the]other hand, the adinterim injunction order [granted ]on23.12.2022 [is ][being]extended from time to time. Petitioners further contend [that ][the ][said]course of action adopted by the Court below is contrary to the [provisions]of Order )CC(IX Rule 3A of CPC.
6. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.
7. Having regard to the submissions made as above, and [the]provisions of Order )frXIX Rule 3A CPC, it is to be noted that once [a]counter is filed to the interlocutory application, whereby ad [interim]injunction is granted, the Court below shall make an endeavour to [finally]dispose of the said application within thirty days from the date [on ][which]the injunction was granted, and where it is unable so to do, [it ][shall ][record]its reasons for such inability.
8. In the facts of the present case, it is not only 30 days but [rnore]than three months had [passed ]by from the date the ad [interim ][injunction]is granted. Further, the docket [proceeding ]also does not show the [Court]below recording its reasons for not being able to dispose [of ][the]interlocutory application and extending the ad interim injunction from [time]
to time. [Thus, ][this ][Cout ][is ][of ][the ][view ][that ][the ][Court below ][is ][to ][be]
directed [to ][dispose ][of ][the ][I'A' ][in ][a ][time ][bound manner']
Accordingly, [[the ][Court ]][[Court ]][[of ][II ][Additional ]][[II ][Additional ]][[Additional ]][[lunior ][Civil ][Judge-cum-Vl]][[Civil ][Judge-cum-Vl]][[Judge-cum-Vl]]
9. Accordingly, [[the ][Court ]][[Court ]][[of ][II ][Additional ]][[II ][Additional ]][[Additional ]][[lunior ][Civil ][Judge-cum-Vl]][[Civil ][Judge-cum-Vl]][[Judge-cum-Vl]]Additional [Metropolitan Magistrate, ][Medchal-Malkaigiri ][District' ][Uppal at]L.B.Nagar, [is directed ][to ][clispose ][of I'A'No'186 ][of ][2022 ][in ][O'S'No'2722 ][of]2022 [pending ][on its file, within ][a ][period ][of ][four ][weeks ][from the ][date ][of]receiPt of [a ][coPY ][of ][this order']
10. Subject [to ][the ][above direction' ][the ][Civil ][Revision ][Petition ][is]disposed [of']
11. Miscellaneous [petitions, ][if any' ][pending in ][this civil ][revision petition]
shall stand [closed. ][No ][order ][as ][to ][costs' ]
sD/- T.JAYASREE [.i;]ASSISTANT [REGISTRAR':?I]t\SECTTON OFFICER
//TRUE COPY//
To,
{. -' The ll Additional [Junior ][Civil ][Judge ][cum ][Vl ]-Additionalttt"oi.tt"t", Medchal [Malkaigiri District, ][Uppal' ][at ][L ][B'Nagar']ttt"oi.tt"t", Medchal [Malkaigiri District, ][Uppal' ][at ][L ][B'Nagar']
Metropolitan
]].liiWll ,
z. d#cCto [sri ][DR. ][KADIRI ][kRtsHxntRu' ][Advocate[oPUC]]
[[DR. ]];. o;; aC io [Sri ][PorrlGARl ][SRIDHAR REDDY' Advocate ][[oPUc]]
4. Two CD [CoPies]
sSP
',,
, [."_:: ], '1r s".,{St,li'.-dq\r;.; :t5 [r]
HIGH COURT
DATED:2911212023
ORDER
GRP.No.3262 of 2023
DISPOSING THE CRP
''\A*o^A,V
It,*'.'asU@UJq:,)a.-=-i.!-ci)o*Dr H9$\
,*'.Eilt:
,f #.ffi: +(. l:1[' ][.. ]t,
.i_t' ^ [. ][-'qlli,]ri,ffi!ir+:. [j]BUITI [, ]I, :Yr1 IIt:+IrE, l.'':,