Telangana High Court
CRP/4523/2009 of Vempati Venkateshwar Rao Vs Nallapati Pandu Ranga Rao on 31 December 2010
SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY C.R.P.No.4523 of 2009 Date: 3.3.2010 Between: Vemapati Venkateshwar Rao, Kodad Village, Nalgonda District. Petitioner And Nallapati Pandu Ranga Rao, Munagala Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District and another. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA
REDDY
C.R.P.No.4523 of 2009Date: 3.3.2010
Between:
Vemapati Venkateshwar Rao,
Kodad Village,
Nalgonda District.
Petitioner
And
Nallapati Pandu Ranga Rao,Munagala Village and Mandal,Nalgonda District and another.
Respondents
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANAREDDYC.R.P.No.4523 of 2009
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 is directed against the order dated1.4.2009 passed in CMA No.5 of 2007 on the file of IIAdditional District Judge, Nalgonda at Suryapet.
The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.20 of 2007. He filed the suit for injunction and also moved I.A.No.33 of2007 seeking injunction. Initially, an ad-interim injunctionwas granted on 19.1.2007 and subsequently, it stoodvacated on 30.4.2007.
The plaintiff filed C.M.A.No.5 of 2007 on the file of IIAdditional District Judge, Nalgonda, assailing the orderdated 30.4.2007 passed in I.A.No.33 of 2007 on the file ofJunior Civil Judge, Kodad.
The learned Additional District Judge, on reappraisal ofthe material brought on record and on hearing the counselappearing for the parties, did not find any valid ground tointerfere with the order passed by the trial Court andaccordingly dismissed the appeal by order dated 1.4.2009. The said order is under challenge in thisrevision.
When the Civil Revision Petition came up foradmission, the respondent entered appearance through acounsel. Both the counsel consented for disposal of thisCivil Revision Petition giving direction to the trial Court todispose of the suit within a time frame.
Considering the submissions made by the learnedcounsel appearing for the parties, the Civil RevisionPetition is disposed of at the admission stage directing thetrial Curt to dispose of the suit being O.S.No.20 of 2007 asexpeditiously as possible, preferably within a period ofthree months from the date of receipt of a copy of thisorder. No costs.
Date:3.3.2010mrb
_______________________________________
JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY