APHC010508882024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No: Between: Mudragada Veera Raghava Rao Dadisetti Venkata Ramana & Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Mr.JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): -None- 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY ,THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No: 2933 of 2024 Mudragada Veera Raghava Rao ...Petitioner/ Plaintiff AND Dadisetti Venkata Ramana & Others ...Respondents / Defendants Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3209] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA etitioner/ Plaintiff espondents / Defendants 2 The Court made the following Order: The present Revision Petition has been filed aggrieved by non-disposal of I.A.No.395 of 2021 in O.S.No.226 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Prathipadu. 2. Heard Ms. Krishna Deepthi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice to the respondents is deemed not necessary as the grievance is non-disposal of Interlocutory Application. 3. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.226 of 2021 referred to above. He filed the said suit for permanent injunction against the defendants and their henchmen restraining them from every interfering with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the plaint schedule property and for costs of the suit. Along with the suit, he filed I.A.No.395 of 2021 under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 and Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘C.P.C.’), seeking ad-interim exparte injunction against the respondents/defendants and their henchmen restraining them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner / plaintiff over the plaint schedule property. In the said I.A., the respondents also filed counter- affidavit on 12.05.2022 and the same is pending. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that though the suit was filed in the year 2021 along with above said I.A., the same has not been taken up for consideration by the learned Trial Court and the matter is being adjourned from time to time. She submits that as per the Rule 3 A of 3 Order XXXIX of C.P.C., the Court ought to have dispose of the petition seeking ad-interim injunction within a period of thirty days and that unless a direction is issued by this Court to dispose of the said I.A., expeditiously, the petitioner would suffer serious prejudice and irreparable loss. 5. Considering the submissions made and perusing the averments made, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Revision Petition, providing that the learned Trial Judge shall make endeavour to dispose of I.A.No.395 of 2021 in O.S.No.226 of 2021 on its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J Date: 10.01.2025 BLV 4 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2933 of 2024 Dt: 10.01.2025 BLV 5