IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 522 OF 2024 Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India aggrieved by the order in I.A.No. -- of 2015 in O.S.No. 17/2018/F2 on the file of the Court of the agent to Government (I.T.D.A.) Between: Vantapalli Srinivas, S/o Veera Raghavulu, aged 55 years, R/o Street no. 6, Old Bhandan Bank Building, Aswaraopeta (V) and (M), Bhadradri Kothagudem District, Telangana State. ...Petitioner/Petitioner/Plaintiff AND 1. Pydi Anasuya, W/o P. D.V.N.S. Murthy, Aged 59 years, R/o D.No. 3-14, Jeelugumilli (V) and (M), Eluru District. 2. Modiyam Srinivasa Rao, W/o Gangaraju, aged 45 years, R/o D.No. 1- 83, Rajanagaram Village, Buttayagudem Mandal, Eluru District. 3. The Manager, Bank of India, Darbhagudem Branch, Eluru District. The Manager, Vijaya Bank, Jeelugumilli(V) and (M), Eluru District. The Manager, Vijaya Bank, Buttayagudem (V) and (M), Eluru District. 4. 5. ...Respondent/Respondents/Defendants 4 lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to declare that the interim order dated 27/11/2023 in O.S.No.17/2018/F2 on the file of The Agent to Government (I.T.D.A), Kotaramachandrapuram is extended further. lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over suit schedule property. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PONNADA SREE WAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: SRI GANDHAM SR PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI K. HARINARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5: SRI DHARA SATYANARAYANA The Court made the following Order: I*', APHC010120552024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 522/2024 Between: Vantipalli Srinivas AND Pydi Anasuya and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) 1.PONNADASREE VYAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.HARINARAYANAK 2.SATYANARAYANA DHARA 3.GANDHAM SR PRASAD The Court made the following: ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the inaction of the Court of the Agent to the Government (I.T.D.A), Kotaramachandrapuram in not numbering an interlocutory application filed in 2023 in O.S.No.17 of 2018/F2, seeking extension of the interim order earlier granted, in respect to the order of this Court in C.R.P.No.471 of 2024 dated 01.03.2024. It is also contended that the Presiding Officer ought to have fixed a date for quick adjudication of the suit. 2 BSB,J C.R.P.No.522 of 2024 In C.R.P No.471 of 2024, this Court passed the following order; “in view of the above facts and circumstances and the submissions made this petition is allowed directing the agent to Government (I.T.D.A) Kotaramachandrapuram to forthwith register the petition filed under section 148 of C.P.C on 27.02.2024 by the petitioner and pass appropriate order thereon. Copy of this order downloaded from the official website may also be treated as valid for the purpose of presentation before the concerned authority. No costs.” Heard, the learned counsel for the respondent No.4 through video conference. The 1®* respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the revision petition is misconceived. It is further stated that after passing the orders in C.R.P.No.471 of 2024, the petitioner herein filed a memo before the lower Court informing the direction in the order in C.R.P.No.471 of 2024 and that the petitioner suppressed certain facts and had never asked for early disposal of the suit at any point of time. According to the 1®* respondent, she filed a partition suit in O.S.No.293 of 2008 on the file of the Court of PrI.Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur and the same was decreed on 12.03.2010 in respect of the subject land in the present suit, however, the petitioner again filed the suit in respect of the same subject land before the agent to the Government in the present matter. This respondent further stated that the authorities mutated her name in the revenue records and issued pattadar pass books and possession certificate and the lower Court, having considered all these facts which were narrated in the written statement, did not extend the interim order dated 27.11.2023. Therefore, this respondent prayed to dismiss the revision petition. 2. 3. revenue Along with the counter affidavit, photostat copy of the written statement, photostat copy of the order of the lower Court dated 11.03.2024, photostat copy of the counter of this respondent filed before the lower Court in the 3. 3 BSB,J C.R.P.No.522 of2024 aA interlocutory application, photostat copy of the mutation certificate issued by the M.R.O, Jeelugumilli dated 12.12.2006, photostat copy of the judgment dated 12.03.2010 in O.S.No.293 of 2008 and photostat copy of the decree therein were filed. ) The relevant part of the order of the lower Court dated 11.03.2024 reads as follows; 4. “ The Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi allowed the civil revision petition of Sri Vantipalli Srinivas in No.471 of 2024 and directed the addl.agent to Government and project officer, ITDA, K.R.Puram to forthwith register the petition filed by the Sri Vantipalli Srinivas Rao on 27.02.2024 requesting for extension of the temporary injunction granted in his favour by this Court on 27.11.2023 beyond 28.02.2024 and pass appropriate orders thereon. The representation of the petitioner is taken on file. The respondent Smt.Pyadi Anasuya w/o D.L.V.N.S.Murthy gave a representation through her counsel on 11-12-2023 requesting for non extension of temporary injunction granted to the petitioner after lapse of 3 months period. Heard the both parties on 28.02.2024. This Court has decided not to extend the temporary injunction granted in favour of the petitioner on 27.11.2023 in O.S.No.17 of 2018/F2 beyond 3 months ie., 28.02.2024. This case will be disposed off on the completion of the trial. The case is posted on 23.03.2024 for next hearing.” A reading of the above order indicates that the Court below, having followed the direction of this Court in C.R.P.No.471 of 2024 took up the file and passed the above said order. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the non extension of the temporary injunction earlier granted, the remedy is otherwise Ti I 4 f BSB,J C.R.P.No.522 of2024 not in the present revision petition. As such the petitioner about the merits and de-merits of the order passed on 11.03.2024. 5. The learned counsel for petitioner requested to direct the expeditiously dispose of the suit. 6. The learned counsel for the 1®‘ and the 2"^ respondents that three weeks back the matter had been posted before the Court below it is for the petitioner to commence the trial. cannot canvass trial Court to represented and 7. In reply, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that unlike Courts, the proceedings before the Courts held by the Agent are not regularly held and therefore there is difficulty in expeditious disposal of the suit, further submitted that as the interim order regular He was not extended, atleast the suit shall be expeditiously disposed of. As the suit is coming up for trial, it is for the plaintiff to commence the trial by filing necessary evidence, both oral and documentary. 8. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to take steps to commence the trial by filing necessary evidence and thereafter the trial Court shall expeditiously dispose of the suit without unnecessary adjournments. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this civil revision petition shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER " ^°‘~^-drapuram, Wes, 2. One CC to Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Gandham SR Prasad, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri K. Harinarayana, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Dhara Satyanarayana, Advocate 6. Three CD Copies To. [OPUC] sree HIGH COURT DATED:21/01/2025 ORDER CRP.No.522 of 2024 12 MAR 2025 ^ ^ . Current Section Zo ( DISPOSING THE C.R.P. WITHOUT COSTS