APHC010170412024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 836/2024 Between: 1. T.JAYAPRAKSH,, S/O T.T.SREENIVASA GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.5-3-3/1, NANEPPA NAGAR, HINDUPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 2. T.J.PRABHAVATHI,, W/O T.JAYAPRAKSH CHUKKA, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.5-3-3/1, NANEPPA NAGAR, HINDUPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. G KRISHNA REDDY, S/o Late G.Narayana Reddy, Aged about 64 years, Occ- Agriculture, R/o D.No.26-4-1770, RTC Colony, Hindupur Town and Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased toThe above named Petitioner begs to submit this Memorandum of Civil Revision Petition questioning the non-disposal of the IA.No.229 of 2023 in OS.No.334 of 2023 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Hindupur Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 2 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 1. M R K CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. The Court made the following: 3 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1102/2024 Between: 1. G KRISHNA REDDY, S/O LATE G.NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, HINDU, AGRICULTURE, R/O D.NO 26-4-1770, RTC COLONY, HINDUPUR TOWN AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. T JAYA PRAKASH, S/O T.T.SREENIVASA GUPTA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, HINDU, BUSINESS, R/O D.NO 5-3- 3/1, NANEPPA NAGAR, HINDUPUR, TOWN AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 2. T J PRABAHAVATHI, W/O T.JAYA PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, HINDU, HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO 5-3- 3/L,NANEPPA NAGAR,HINDUPUR, TOWN AND MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased topleased to set aside the Order dated 19.04.2024 passed in I.A.No. 109 of 2024 in I.A.No. 229 of 2023 in O.S.No. 336 of 2023 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge Court, Hindupur. Sri Satya Sai District, the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to grant Extension of stay in the Order dated 19.04.2024 passed I.A. No. 109 of 2024. in I.A.No. 229 of 2023 in O.S.No. 336 of 2023 on the file of Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur, Sri Satya Sal District, pending disposal of C.R.P.No. of 2023 and pass 4 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N RANGA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. M R K CHAKRAVARTHY The Court made the following: 5 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 COMMON ORDER The issues involved in these revision petitions are interconnected and hence these matters are taken up together and disposed of by a common order. 2. The parties will hereinafter be referred to as arrayed in the suit. 3. In C.R.P. No.836 of 2024, the defendants in the suit are the revision petitioners and the plaintiff is the respondent. In C.R.P. No.1102 of 2024, the plaintiff in the suit is the revision petitioner and the defendants are the respondents. 4. Initially, aggrieved by the order dated 17.08.2023 passed in I.A. No.229 of 2023 in O.S. No.336 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur, whereby, the trial Court granted ad interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff, the defendants filed C.R.P. No.836 of 2024. Pending the revision, the plaintiff filed C.R.P. No.1102 of 2024, aggrieved by the order dt.19.04.2024 in I.A. No.109 of 2024 in I.A. No.229 of 2023 in O.S. No.336 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur, whereby, the trial Court dismissed the petition filed for extension of interim order granted on 17.08.2023. 6 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 5. The claim of the plaintiff is that he is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property under a registered sale deed dated 06.12.2007, and he is in possession. As the defendants are attempting to interfere with his possession over the subject property, the plaintiff filed suit in O.S. No. 336 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur, seeking permanent injunction. Pending the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.229 of 2023 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking temporary injunction. The Trial Court considered the I.A. and granted ad-interim injunction on 16.08.2023. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants filed C.R.P. No.836 of 2024. 6. Be that as it may, seeking extension of ad interim injunction, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.109 of 2024 in the said suit. The Trial Court dismissed the said I.A. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff filed C.R.P. No. 1102 of 2024. 7. Heard the submissions of both the learned counsel. 8. The learned counsel for the plaintiff has submitted that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property under a registered sale deed dated 06.12.2007 and has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. It is 7 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 submitted that the defendants, having no right, title or interest over the property, are attempting to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed O.S. No.336 of 2023 seeking permanent injunction. The learned counsel further submitted that the Trial Court, after considering the prima facie case, granted ad interim injunction in I.A. No.229 of 2023 on 16.08.2023. It is submitted that the dismissal of I.A. No.109 of 2024 seeking extension of the ad interim injunction is erroneous and has resulted in grave prejudice to the plaintiff, as there is every likelihood of the defendants interfering with the suit schedule property. 9. Per contra, the learned counsel for the defendants submitted that the ad-interim injunction was granted without proper consideration of the material on record and that the same is already under challenge in C.R.P. No.836 of 2024 and hence, the C.R.P. No.1102 of 2024 is not maintainable. 10. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for both parties and perusing the material available on record, it is evident that an ad interim injunction was granted in 8 VS,J C.R.P.NOS.836 & 1102 OF 2024 I.A. No.229 of 2023 on 16.08.2023, and the same is the subject matter of challenge in C.R.P. No.836 of 2024 filed by the defendants. Pending the revision, the plaintiff sought extension of the ad interim injunction by filing I.A. No.109 of 2024. The Trial Court, upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the said application. This Court finds no ground to interfere with the order impugned in I.A. No.109 of 2024. It is also pertinent to note that I.A. No.229 of 2023 is pending consideration. 11. Hence, without going into the merits of the case, these Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of, directing the Trial Court to dispose of the I.A. No.229 of 2023 in O.S. No.336 of 2023 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these petitions are closed. __________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Dt.28.11.2025 LSP