SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 1221

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
K.Sreenivasa Reddy, J.
Yeddula Rami Reddy - Appellant
Versus
M.Indira - Respondent
Civil Revision Petition No. 202 of 2022
Decided On : 13-10-2023

Advocates appeared:
G.Ramachandra Reddy, Advocate, K.Mohan Rami Reddy, Advocate

Grant of police aid can only be made when there is a decree for permanent injunction or an order of temporary injunction made absolute after hearing both parties.

Headnote:

POLICE AID - Civil Suit - Rai Naramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2021 (3) ALD 238 (AP) - The court discussed the legal provisions related to the grant of police aid in cases of temporary injunction and emphasized that police aid can only be granted when there is a decree for permanent injunction or an order of temporary injunction made absolute after hearing both parties. The court highlighted the necessity for the plaintiff to show concrete evidence of interference with peaceful possession after the grant of injunction and the obligation to file a complaint with the police. The court concluded that the impugned order granting police aid was not in accordance with the law and set it aside.

JUDGMENT

1. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order dtd. 16/12/2021 passed in IA No.721 of 2018 in IA No.677 of 2017 in OS No.672 of 2017 by the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, directing the Station House Officer, G.D. Nellore Police Station to provide police aid to 1st respondent herein/plaintiff as and when required.

2. Petitioner herein is 1st defendant, 1st respondent herein is plaintiff and 2nd respondent herein is 2nd defendant in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to, as they are arrayed in the suit.

3. Plaintiff filed the suit in OS No.672 of 2017 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, for declaration of title and for grant of permanent injunction against the defendants 1 and 2. In the said suit, she filed IA No.677 of 2017 for grant of temporary injunction and the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, by an order dtd. 13/12/2017, granted ex parte ad-interim injunction in her favour. Subsequently, she filed IA No.721 of 2018 for grant of police aid by directing the Sub-Inspector of Police, GD Nellore Police Station to give protection to her and to the petition schedule property. By an order dtd. 16/12/2021, the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, allowed the said application and the Station House Officer, G.D. Nellore Police Station was directed to provide police aid to the plaintiff as and when required. Aggrieved by the said orders, the present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by 1st defendant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner/1st defendant submits that, nowhere in the affidavit filed by the plaintiff it is stated that the defendants are interfering with her peaceful possession over the petition schedule property, except making a vague and bald statement to the extent that the defendants are giving troubles to her in enjoying the suit schedule property and beyond that no specific instance has been mentioned in the affidavit, as to when the defendants interfered with her peaceful possession over the petition schedule property. Learned counsel further submits that basing on the ex parte ad-interim injunction orders, plaintiff obtained police protection even though 1st defendant filed his counter and he is ready for inquiry in the injunction petition. He further submits that an order of police protection could not have been granted pursuant to an ex parte ad-interim injunction, while the application for injunction is pending adjudication, and in support of his contention he relied on a decision reported in Rai Naramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2021 (3) ALD 238 (AP)

5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of 1st respondent/plaintiff submits that when a temporary injunction is granted, it goes without saying that police aid can be provided when the defendants are interfering with the peaceful possession of plaintiff over the petition schedule property.

6. Heard. Perused the material on record.

7. In Rai Naramma's case (supra), relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner/1st defendant, in paragraph 7, it was held thus.

"7. It is now well settled law that only when there is a decree for permanent injunction and only when there is an order of temporary injunction in an interlocutory application which is made absolute after hearing both the parties, then only the Courts usually either the Civil Court or the Writ Court, would grant police aid for effective implementation of the said permanent injunction decree or a temporary injunction order which is passed on merits. But when the ex parte ad-interim injunction is granted without hearing the respondents and when the same is not made absolute granting a temporary injunction order, till the disposal of the suit, on merits, the Courts will not usually order for grant of police aid for implementation of the ex parte ad-interim injunction order. Since it is not an order on merits after hea

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top