APHC010024922023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.61 OF 2023 Between: Vakati Venkata Sesha Reddy, S/o.Late Sundara Rami Reddy, Aged about 52 years, Occ:Agriculture, R/o.H.No.26-12-1262, Kondayapalem, A.K.Nagar Post, Nellore Town, SPSR Nellore District, and another. ...Appellants AND Chinthalapalli Sailajamma, W/o.Sudhakar Reddy, aged about 60 years, Occ: House wife, R/o.Penubarthi Village, Nellore Rural Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the Appellants : Mr.P.Ganga Rami Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.C.Subodh The Court made the following JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) The present appeal has been preferred against the orders dated 02.11.2022 in I.A. No.545 of 2022 in O.S. No.90 of 2022 on the file of the Court of I Additional District Judge, Nellore. 2. The appellants herein are the plaintiffs in the said suit filed for partition of the plaint schedule properties and allotment of each 1/12th share to the plaintiffs, 1/6th share each to the defendants 1, 2, 3 and 5, and 1/12th share each to the defendants 4 and 6. Along with the suit, they 2 CMA_61_2023 filed I.A. No.545 of 2022 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking temporary injunction restraining the respondents/defendants, their men and agents from making any alienations or encumbrances of the petition/plaint schedule property pending disposal of the suit. On 08.8.2022, ad interim injunction was granted. 3. The respondent filed counter and contested the said I.A. The learned Trial Court, after detailed consideration of the matter and recording its conclusions as set out in Paragraph No.22 of the order, vacated the ad interim injunction granted on 08.8.2022. 4. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants with regard to the grounds raised in the Memorandum of Appeal. Admittedly, learned Additional District Judge granted ad interim injunction, however, by the impugned order dated 02.11.2022 vacated the same. The appeal was preferred on 19.1.2023 and no interim orders are granted. 5. In the light of the above stated position and though the order under challenge appears to be sound, without going into merits as also considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants, the appeal is disposed of providing that the learned Trial Court shall make endeavour to dispose of the suit in accordance with Law, as expeditiously as possible. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J ____________________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J August 29, 2025 vasu