( 1 ) SINCE the issue arises for consideration in all these revisions is one and the same, they can be disposed of by a common order.

( 2 ) THE revision petitioners, who claim to have been in occupation of the shops belonging to the Ramalayam Trust Board -1st respondent, instituted O. S. No. 650 of 2003 for declaration that they are the tenants and are having occupancy rights in respect of the schedule property i. e. , shops and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their agents from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property, unless and until the defendants resort to due process for their eviction. Pending disposal of the suit, they have filed Interlocutory Applications under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking an ex parte prohibitory injunction against the respondents restraining them from interfering with the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property. In the said suit, the lower Court granted ad interim ex pane injunction and when the IAs. were taken up for hearing, the petitioners, who alleged to be the tenants, intended to mark a document, namely, deed for acceptance, dated 15-5-2003, as an exhi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document