ORDER :

1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the order, dated 20.12.2021 in I.A. No. 310 of 2021 in A.S. No. 34 of 2021, on the file of the XIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Narsaraopet.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Respondents and perused the material available on record.

3. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff and respondents herein are defendants in O.S. No. 369 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narsaraopet and the Respondents are defendants in the suit and Respondents in 1st Appeal.

4. The petitioner herein filed a suit in O.S. No. 369 of 2018 for recovery of possession of suit schedule property from the defendants therein. The said suit was decreed by decree and judgment, dated 02.09.2021 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narsaraopet with costs directing the defendants therein to deliver possession of the suit schedule property to the plaintiff within one month from the date of the decree and judgment and also made it clear that on failure, the plaintiff is entitled to enforce the decree in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the decree and judgment in O.S. No. 369 of 2018, the 1st Respondent herein filed an appeal in A.S. No. 34 of 2021 on the file of the XIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Narsaraopet.

5. In the said appeal in A.S. No. 34 of 2021, the 1st Respondent filed I.A. No. 310 of 2021 under Order 41, Rule 5(1) of C.P.C. to suspend the operation of the decree and judgment passed in O.S. No. 369 of 2018, dated 02.09.2021, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narsaraopet, till disposal of the appeal. The said application is allowed by the Appellate Court, grating stay of execution of the decree and judgment, dated 02.09.2021 passed in O.S. No. 369 of 2018 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narsaraopet, on depositing of suit costs before the trial Court within a week. Aggrieved by the order, dated 20.12.2021 in I.A. No. 310 of 2021 in A.S. No. 34 of 2021 by the XIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Narsaraopet, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Appellate Court ought not to have allowed I.A. No. 310 of 2021 in view of the fact that the trial Court has passed the well considered judgment and decree after considering the pleadings and evidence adduced by both parties. The Appellate Court erred in observing that the O.S. No. 48 of 2010 filed by the petitioner was dismissed. In fact, the said suit was decreed and O.S. No. 234 of 2009 filed by the 1st Respondent herein is dismissed.

7. The learned counsel further submits that the lower Appellate Court miserably failed to consider that the 1st respondent failed in trial Court level and two appellate courts level for his claim for the specific performance of the agreement of sale. If the appellate court considering the observations and findings of the trial court while decreeing the suit in favour of the petitioner wherein it is clearly mentioned that the alleged agreement of sale is forged and fabricated one and the same finding has been affirmed by the First and Second Appellate Courts in the earlier round of litigations. As such, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought to set aside the order, dated 20.12.2021 in I.A. No. 310 of 2021 in A.S. No. 34 of 2021 passed by the XIII Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Narsaraopet by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.

8. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the trial court failed to consider the facts in proper perspective and the 1st respondent is having good case in the appeal and as such granting stay of execution of the decree and judgment, dated 02.09.2021 in O.S. No. 369 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Narsaraopet by the appellate Court is to protect the interest of the 1st respondent herein during the pendency of the appeal in A.S. No. 34 of 2021. The learned counsel for the 1s