'J. if ’ > ^ APHC010282982021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY fo TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 198 OF 2021 Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 of CPC, against the Order and Decree dated 25-02-2020 passed in I.A.No.337 of 2016 in O.S.No.139 of 2016 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District. Between: 1. M/s.C.K.S.Teja Hotels Pvt., Ltd., Having its Office at 14-182, Padmavathipuram, Tiruchanur Road, Tirupati, Rep by its Managing Director, Chadalvada Krishnamoorthy, S/o.C.Venkata Subbaiah. 2. Chadalvada Sucharitha, W/o.Chadalvada Krishnamoorthy, R/o.14-182, Padmavathipuram, Tiruchanur Road, Tirupati. 3. Sri Krishna Filling Station, rep by its Proprietrix, Chadalvada Sucharitha, W/o.Chadalvada Krishnamoorthy, R/o.14-182, Padmavathipuram, Tiruchanur Road, Tirupati. ...Appellants/Defendants AND Reliance Industrious Ltd, Registered under Companies Act, 1956 and has its Regd., Office at Maker Chambers IV, 3"'^ Floor, 222, Nariman Point, Mumbai and also Office at 3’’^ Floor, Reliance Majestic Building B.B. Ic, 8020626, Road No.11, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-34, Represented by its G.P.A., and Authorised Signatory, Phani Madhav Prabhaker, S/o.D.Venkata Rao. ...Respondent/Plaintiff lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of temporary injunction that is granted in favour of the Respondent restraining the Petitioners herein, vide Order and Judgment dated 25.02.2020 in I.A.No.337 of 2016 in O.S.No.139 of 2016 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, pending disposal of the above appeal. Counsel for Appellants: Sri N.Ashwani Kumar Counsel for Respondent: Sri Sai Sanjay Suraneni The Court made the following Judgment: \ APHC010282982021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 198/2021 Between: 1,M/S C.K.S. TEJA HOTELS PVT., LTD.,, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 14-182, PADMAVATHIPURAM, TIRUCHANUR ROAD, TIRUPATI, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, CHADALVADA KRISHNAMOORTHY S/0 C. VENKATA SUBBAIAH. 2. CHADALVADA SUCHARITHA,, W/0 CHADALVADA KRISHNAMOORTHY 3.SRI KRISHNA FILLING STATION,, REP BY ITS PROPRIETRIX, CHADALVADA SUCHARITHA, W/0 CHADALVADA KRISHNAMOORTHY. ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1. RELIANCE INDUSTRIOUS LTD, Registered under Companies Act, 1956 and has its Regd., office at Maker Chambers IV, 3hl Floor, 222, Nariman Point, Mumbai And also office at 3rd Floor, Reliance Majestic Building, B.B. Ic, 8020626, Road No. 11, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 34, Represented by its G.P.A., and authorised signatory, Phani Madhav Prabhaker, S/o D. Venkata Rao. ...RESPONDENT Appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 CPC is filed against the Order and Decree dated 25.02.2020 passed in I.A.No.337 of 2016 in O.S. No.139 of 2016 on the file of Judge, Family Court - Cum V Additional District Judge, Tirupati in granting temporary injunction in favour of the Respondent restraining the Appellants, their men, agents from interfering with the Respondent's peaceful possession and enjoyment over the subject property. 2 CGR, J. C.M.A.No.l98of2021 Counsel for the Appellant: 1. NASHWAN I KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1.SAi SANJAYSURANENI The Court made the following: CGR, J. C.M.A.No.igSof 2021 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.198 of 2021 JUDGMENT: Present appeal is preferred assailing the order, dated 25.02.2020, passed in l.A.No.337 of 2016 in O.S.No.139 of 2016 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati. 2. Appellants are defendants in the Suit. Suit initially was filed by respondent herein for permanent injunction restraining defendants in from changing the physical features of the plaint schedule property which was licensed area under the Petroleum Act and the Rules and for other reliefs. The plaint schedule property admeasuring 1645.60 sq, yards owned by 1®‘ appellant has been given on lease to 2"'^ appellant vide lease deed, dated 31.01.2005 with a provision enabling 2’'^ appellant to further sub-lease the same. In pursuance to the same, the 2"'^ appellant entered into a registered sub-lease, dated 13.05.2005 with the respondent/plaintiff for a period of 20 years commencing from 13.05.2005 and upto 12.05.2025. Thereafter, the respondent herein has come up with petrol retail outlet over the said property after securing necessary permissions. When the appellants herein tried to interfere with the said plaint schedule property and attempted to dislocate petrol retail outlet, present Suit came to be any way C6R, J. C.M.A.No,198of 2021 preferred. Along with the Suit, the respondent/plaintiff also filed I.A.No.337 of 2016 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking temporary injunction. The same was contested and ultimately, by impugned order, dated 25.02.2020, temporary injunction came to be granted pending disposal of the Suit. 3. This Court while issuing notice to the respondent, on 11.08.2021 directed both parties to maintain status quo existing as on that day. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that in view of the status quo order granted by this Court, the petrol retail outlet continued in the said premises. However, as could be seen from very pleadings in the Suit, the very basis for institution of the same was the registered sub-lease, dated 13.05.2005 which was for a period of 20 years to end by 12.05.2025, therefore, in view of expiry of lease period, the cause in the Suit no longer survives. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the prayer set out in the Suit at para.25 of the plaint. As the cause in the Suit does not survive, question of continuing the injunction beyond the lease period does not arise. 5. Per contra, on the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent tried to support the order under challenge, however, has not denied nor shown anything from the documents, in particular, regarding the tenure of the sub-lease expiring on 12.05.2025. CGR, J. C.M,A,No.l98 of 2021 % This Court is conscious of the fact that the temporary injunction 6; was granted pending disposal of the Suit. As Suit relates to the year 2016, and still the same not decided, on efflux of time period agreed under the lease, this Court cannot continue the injunction beyond the period of lease. The right accrued in favour of the respondent/plaintiff to continue over the subject property, being the sub-lease, ends with the period of lease i.e., by 12.5.2025. The respondent cannot take the benefit of the said sub-lease or continue in the said property for a period more than what has been provided under the sub-lease. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that in fact, the respondent has already surrendered the property back to the appellants and they are now in possession and enjoyment of the However, learned 7. same, virtually rendering the Suit infructuous. counsel for the respondent reports no such instructions. In case if the plaint schedule property is not already surrendered, the appellants are given liberty to take appropriate legal 8. steps for securing the possession. Accordingly, in view of above subsequent developments and observations of this Court, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order, dated 25.02.2020, passed in l.A.No.337 of 2016 in O.S.No.139 9. 6 r CGR, J. C.M.A.No.lSSof 2021 of 2016 on the file of the Judge, Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, is hereby set aside. No order as to costs. 10. As the Suit was instituted in the year 2016 and that now having regard to the subsequent developments that the very sub-lease itself has expired by 12.05.2025, the learned trial Court is directed to dispose of the Suit expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As a sequel. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Judge, Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati Chittoor District. 2. One CC to Sri N.Ashwani Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Sai Sanjay Suraneni, Advocate [OPUC] 4. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 5. Two CD Copies BSV vna HIGH COURT DATED:29/07/2025 JUDGMENT CMA NO. 198 OF 2021 ALLOWING THE CMA WITHOUT COSTS