( 1 ) THE petitioner is the defendant. The Civil Revision Petition is filed feeling aggrieved by order, dated 14. 02. 2005 in I. A. No. 5643 of 2004 in O. S. No. 70 of 2004 passed by the Court of the II Additional district Judge, Vijayawada, granting ad interim injunction in favour of the respondent (hereafter called, the plaintiff) restraining the petitioner herein (hereafter called, the defendant) from making use of the suit schedule premises, from which the plaintiff was evicted nor alter, meddle with the premises in any manner whatsoever pending disposal of the suit.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff filed the suit under Section 6 of the Specific relief Act, 1963 for recovery of possession. She alleged that she is carrying on business in the name and style of M/s. Swagruha foods, Vijayawada, since 1990 in sweets, pickles and savouries, that the defendant firm was granted licence by Indian Railway catering and Tourism Corporation Limited (IRCTC) to setup and operate Food Plaza at Vijayawada Railway Station, that the defendant granted a sub-licence to the plaintiff after accepting the deposit of Rs. 2,40,000/-, that a space of 10 x 10 was provided in the Food Plaza for opening a sweet stall, that she opened such sweet stall on 10. 05. 2004 and that on 30,09. 2004, the Manager of the defendant forcibly removed the plaintiffs from the suit premises. She, therefore, claimed recovery of possession under section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. She also filed I. A. No. 5643 of 2004 for ad interim injunction restraining the defendant from making use of the premises in any manner. The trial Court initially granted ad interim ex parte injunction on 07. 10. 2004. The plaintiff also filed IA. No. 6067 of 2004 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) alleging disobedience by the defendant.

( 3 ) THE defendant filed written statement as well as counter affidavit in the interlocutory application for injunction. The defendant firm denied the core allegations of the of the plaintiff and set up a case to the effect that M/s. Srinathji Caterers, a partnership firm was granted sub-lease to use the outlet facing towards platform No. 1, and that the said firm is purchasing food items from different concerns including the plaintiff. It was alleged that an amount of Rs. 2,40,000/- was accepted from the plaintiff for security deposit for supply of their sweets to M/s. Srinathji caterers. The allegation that the premises was given to the plaintiff was denied.

( 4 ) LEARNED trial Judge considered the pleadings and the documents filed by the contesting parties (Exs. A. 1 to A. 12 filed by the plaintiffs and Exs. B. l to B. 17 filed by the defendants ). After such consideration, lower Court arrived at the following prima facie conclusions: that the suit by the: sub-licensee against a licensee is maintainable, that the sub-licence in favour of M/s. Srinathji caterers as alleged by the defendants on the date of opening of the plaintiffs stall, M/s. Swagruha Foods is not proved, that plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- pursuant to oral agreement of sub-licence and that the plaintiff established pre- requisites for grant of temporary injunction. Accordingly, the interim injunction granted on 07. 10. 2004 was made absolute.

( 5 ) IT is brought to the notice: of this Court - which is not denied by the counsel for the defendant - that the plaintiff filed a caveat petition under Section 148a of CPC before this Court expecting that the defendant would file a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under order XLIII Rule 1 (r) of the CPC. The defendant did not file C. M. A. , within the prescribed period of limitation of 90 days. By reason of this, the order passed by the lower Court became final. Curiously, on 31. 01. 2006, after almost 11 months after the order of the lower court, the defendant filed the present Civil Revision Petition under article 227 of Constitution of India. Presumably for this reason, the learned counsel for the plaintiff/responde

Click Here to Read the rest of this document