Telangana High Court
CRP/2183/2012 of Subrahmanyeswara Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., Ambajipeta Vs Kamuju Subrahmanyam Kanaka Durga on 31 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY C.R.P.No.2183 OF 2012 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against order dated 27.04.2012 passed in I.A.No.325 of 2012 in O.S.No.48 of 2012 (IA) by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Amalapuram. The petitioner herein is the defendant and the
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.
Arguments
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHANREDDY
C.R.P.No.2183 OF 2012
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition is directed against orderdated 27.04.2012 passed in I.A.No.325 of 2012 inO.S.No.48 of 2012 (IA) by the Principal Junior Civil Judge,Amalapuram.
The petitioner herein is the defendant and therespondents herein are the plaintiffs in the suit.
O.S.No.48 of 2012 was filed by the plaintiffs seekingthe relief of permanent injunction restraining therespondent from installing palm oil factory in the suitschedule property. Pending the suit, they filed I.A. seekinginterim injunction restraining the respondent his men,followers, agents, associates, not to open and run thefactory in the schedule properties. The Court belowdirected the defendant not to proceed with furtherconstruction in the property for five days. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is preferred.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits thatalready the factory in question was started in the suitschedule property whereby the suit filed for permanentinjunction has become infructuous. He further submits that the Court below without properly considering thematter granted the relief.
On the other hand, learned counsel for therespondents submits that the order passed by the Courtbelow is just and proper and it needs no interference.
I have gone through the order impugned and therelevant record. It is made clear that the Court belowfailed to pass any speaking order considering the relevantfactors.
Hence, the matter is remanded to the Court belowfor fresh consideration. The Court below is directed todispose of the matter within one month from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this order, after hearing both theparties and after considering all the relevant material. TheCourt below shall also consider prima facie as to whetherthe suit has become infructuous. Both the parties aredirected to maintain status quo of the property for a periodof one month.
Civil Revision Petition is allowed accordingly.
______________________________
JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY
Dt.31.12.2012rkk