APHC010374592012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3459] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 484/2012 Between: 1. PALLELA GANESH, S/O. LATE RAGHAVULU, EASTERN STREET, NEAR SANTHANA VENUGOPALA SWAMY TEMPLE, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. THE GOVT OF A P ANO, REP BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER, ENDOWMENTS DEPARTMENT, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. SRI SANTHANA VENUGOPALA SWAMY TEMPLE, DEVASTHANAM EASTERN STREET, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REP BY ITS MANAGER ...RESPONDENT(S): Appeal Under Section_____against orders to declare the Judgement (Award) passed by the Hon'ble A.P. Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad, in OA No. 2464/2010 (Old OA No. 30/2009 before deputy Commissioner, Kakinada),dated 17-3-2012, is illegal, contrary to A.P. Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, and consequently to set aside the same, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2012(CMAMP 977 OF 2012 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 direct the Respondents to maintain Status-Quo of the possession of the petitioner in the building in an extent of 138 Sq.yards, in T.S. NO. 1099, situated at Eastern Street, Eluru, West Godavari JS, J CMA No.484 of 2012 2 District,by receiving the rent from the petitioner, pending disposal of the CMA and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2012(CMAMP 1349 OF 2012 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 vacate the interim stay granted in CMAMP.no. 977 of 2012 in CMA.NO. 484 of 2012 dated 25-6-2012 Counsel for the Appellant: 1. S SYAMSUNDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR APPEALS 2. V VENUGOPALA RAO 3. E SAMBASIVA PRATAP The Court made the following: JS, J CMA No.484 of 2012 3 JUDGMENT: The brief facts of the case are that the lease period of the appellant expired on 14.06.2007. The respondents issued a quit notice dated 03.03.2008, i.e., Ex.P.2. The appellant has continued to occupy the petition schedule property without challenging the quit notice. 2. The appellant/respondent has filed O.A. No. 2464 of 2010 (Old No. 30 of 2009 of D.C. KKD) before the Andhra Pradesh Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad. On 17.03.2012, the OA was allowed, directing the appellant/respondent to evict and hand over the petition schedule property to the 2nd respondent-temple within one month from the date of the award. 3. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed the present appeal. On 25.06.2012, this Court, while directing personal notice to the respondents, ordered that status quo existing as on that day be maintained. By virtue of this status quo granted by this Court, the appellant has continued in possession of the petition schedule property without depositing rents. 4. On the other hand, Smt. Pulipati Radhika, learned Standing Counsel representing the 2nd respondent-temple, submits that the appellant, without challenging the quit notice dated 03.03.2008, has continued in the petition schedule property without depositing the rents. JS, J CMA No.484 of 2012 4 i) The learned Standing Counsel further submits that, by virtue of the status quo orders granted by this Court, the temple is not proceeding with the auction notification and that the appellant temple is losing its monthly rental income, and prays for the dismissal of the appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant, in reply, submits that the appellant/respondent is ready and willing to pay the arrears of rent, and further, preference shall be given to the appellant if the temple proceeds with the auction notification. Furthermore, the learned counsel requests six months to vacate the petition schedule property. 6. The appellant was continuing in the possession of the petition schedule property without challenging the quit notice dated 03.02.2008. 7. It is also undisputed that the OA filed by the second respondent- temple was allowed by the Tribunal on 17.03.2012. 8. Furthermore, it is undisputed that, by virtue of the status quo order passed by this Court, the appellant continues to hold possession of the petition schedule property. 9. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has been continuing in possession of the property for the last 13 years without depositing the rents. JS, J CMA No.484 of 2012 5 10. Since the appellant has not challenged the quit notice issued by the 2nd respondent temple, the balance of convenience favours the 2nd respondent temple. 11. Therefore, this Court considers it appropriate to direct the appellant to vacate and surrender possession of the petition schedule property to the 2nd respondent-temple within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. However, it is open to the 2nd respondent-temple to initiate appropriate action for the recovery of arrears from the date of the status quo order passed by this Court, i.e., 25.06.2012, till the appellant vacates the petition schedule property. It is also open for the 2nd respondent-temple to issue an auction notice for the petition schedule property. 12. With these observations, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM 23rd September, 2025. cbn JS, J CMA No.484 of 2012 6 26 THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM CMA No.484 of 2012 23rd September, 2025 cbn