Telangana High Court
CRP/6044/2010 of K.S.K.V.Prasada Rao Vs K.Venkata Naveen on 31 December 2010
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE 31st DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.6044 OF 2010 Between: K.S.K.V.Prasada Rao … Petitioner And k.Venkata Naveen and others … Respondents This
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH ATHYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE 31[st] DAY OF DECEMBER,TWO THOUSAND AND TEN
PRESENT
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.6044 OF 2010
Between:K.S.K.V.Prasada Rao
And
… Petitioner
k.Venkata Naveen and others
… Respondents
This Court made the following:
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.6044 OF 2010
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 under Article 227 of the Constitution complaininginaction on the part of V Additional District Judge, Mahila Sessionscourt, Vijaawada in disposing of I.A.No.763 of 2009 in O.S.No.59 of2006, which was filed for temporary injunction.
Admittedly, the injunction application itself was filed in themonth of June, 2008 before II Additional District Judge, Krishna,Vijaawada, which was later transferred to the Court of V AdditionalDistrict Judge, Mahila Court, Vijayawada in the year 2009. Thepetitioner who is the respondent/defendant in the said I.A. filed a counter expressing no objection for grant of injunction. Since the suitis filed for partition of the plaint schedule properties, the petitionermoved this court contending that the said I.A. has not been disposedof.
There is no explanation forthcoming as to what prevented thepetitioner from moving an application seeking to advance the hearingof the petition before the trial court. Merely because lawyers are goingon strike from October 2010 onwards, cannot be a ground to grantinjunction, which was not granted by the trial court nor the petitionerhas made any endeavour in that regard. Therefore, this Court does notfind any merit to entertain the present revision.
The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, the V Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, before whomthe said I.A. is pending, is directed to dispose of the same within twomonths from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not alreadydisposed of. If the advocates are not cooperating, he can pass exparte orders basing on the material available on record. There shallbe no order as to costs.
December 31, 2010lmv
__________________
A.GOPAL REDDY, J