APHC010011922025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] FRIDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 843/2025 Between: 1. NEERUKONDA DIVAKAR, V ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, C 2. THE STATE OF AP, S ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: 2 ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri A.S.K.S.Bharghav, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri P.Durga Prasad, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri K.Arjun Chowdary, learned Assistant Government Pleader. 2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Writ Petitioner herein has filed O.S.No.10 of 2023 against the Unofficial Respondents herein seeking relief of permanent injunction. In an Application filed by the Writ Petitioner under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of C.P.C. bearing I.A.No.244 of 2023, the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Yelamanchili dated 09.05.2023 (Ex.P5) was pleased to grant an Ad-Interim Ex-parte Injunction in favour of the Writ Petitioner (Plaintiff) and against the Unofficial Respondents herein (Defendants therein). Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that despite the fact that the time was granted for the Defendants to file Written Statements in the Suit and Counter Affidavits in I.A.No.244 of 2023, till date, defendants therein (Unofficial Respondents herein) have neither filed their Counter Affidavits in the said Interlocutory Application nor have they filed their Written Statements. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that in view of these facts, the interim injunction granted in favour of the Writ Petitioner and against the Unofficial Respondents herein (defendants) is still subsisting. 3. Despite the said interim injunction granted by the Civil Court, the Unofficial Respondents herein (the defendants) were still interfering with the peaceful enjoyment of the Petitioner. The Petitioner has submitted a 3 Representation before the RDO on 10.07.2023 and the RDO had passed an Order on 07.09.2023, indicating that it is a civil dispute and therefore no protection much less police protection can be granted. 4. In the case of Meera Chauhan Vs. Harsh Bishnoi and another1 , the Hon’ble Apex Court has clarified the position with regard to the powers of the Civil Court to the effect that the Civil Court has all the powers to issue any interim orders in order to protect the interest of the parties. The Apex Court has further laid down that the Civil Court, while exercising powers under Section 151 of C.P.C., has got the powers to do complete justice even by issuing necessary directions to the Revenue Authorities as well as the Police by invoking its inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 5. Under the present circumstances, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petitioner ought to have approached the Civil Court by filing appropriate application for seeking protection in terms of the interim injunction which is already granted. This apart, the present impugned order dated 07.09.2023 has been challenged belatedly. In any case, the impugned order indicates that no such protection can be granted in view of the pendency of a Civil Suit, which is also incorrect in as much as the Official Respondents are duty bound to provide necessary protection in order to give complete effect to the interim injunction granted by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Yelamanchili. Accordingly, this impugned order is set aside. Liberty is granted to the Writ 1 (2007) 12 SCC 201 4 Petitioner to approach the Civil Court by moving appropriate application seeking appropriate relief. 6. With these observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. If any I.A is filed by the Writ Petitioner seeking protection, the Civil Court may consider the same in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, in any case within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of the said I.A. 7. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENIRAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 10.01.2025 VTS