IMPORTANT POINT
The court discussed the provisions of Order XXXIX Rule 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure and its implications on the grant of temporary injunction.

ORDER

M.G.Priyadarsini, J. - Aggrieved by the order and decree dated 10.08.2023 (hereinafter will be referred to as 'impugned order') in CMA No.33 of 2022 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sangareddy District, the respondents/ defendants i.e., revision petitioners herein filed the present Civil Revision Petition to set aside the impugned order.

2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred as per their array before the trial Court i.e., learned Senior Civil Judge, Zaheerabad.

3. The brief facts of the case as can be seen from the record available before the Court are that petitioner/plaintiff filed O.S.No.24 of 2022 before the learned Senior Civil Judge at Zaheerabad for the relief of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from interfering with his possession and enjoyment in respect of the suit schedule property. Along with the said suit, the petitioner/plaintiff has filed I.A.No.347 of 2022 in O.S.No.24 of 2022 seeking ad interim exparte injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from interfering with his possession and enjoyment in respect of the suit schedule property. The contention of the petitioner/plaintiff before the trial Court as can be seen from the affidavit filed in support of the petition in I.A.No.347 of 2022 are as under:

a) Respondent No.1 is the husband of respondent No.7, Respondent No.2 is the husband of respondent No.8. Respondent Nos.4 to 6 are the sons of respondent No.1. Respondent No.3 is the mother of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Respondent No.3 is the second wife of petitioner/plaintiff.

b) The petitioner/plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule 'A' to 'C' properties, which are his self acquired properties. Earlier, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed a suit for partition vide O.S.No.86 of 2009 on the file of Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Offences under SC/ST (POA) Act - cum V Additional District, Medak at Sangareddy against the petitioner/plaintiff and his wife Sali Bai and their children, however, the same was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner/plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule lands therein that are subject matter in the present suit. The Court also declared that respondent No.3 is the second wife of the petitioner/plaintiff.

c) There was no coparcenary property inherited by the petitioner/plaintiff. The father of the petitioner/plaintiff late Vasuram acquired some of the properties with his own self exertion. During his life time, the father of the petitioner/plaintiff partitioned his properties among his three sons. The petitioner/plaintiff did petty civil contracts and he was elected as Samithi President. The petitioner/plaintiff acquired some suit schedule properties out his own source and also gave Ac.6.00 guntas of land to respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the said lands were not made subject matter of the suit.

d) The respondents/defendant have no right or interest in the suit land. The respondents/defendant have developed jealousy against the children of Sali Bai and as they are well educated the suit schedule lands shall be given to them only and thus, they are not allowing the petitioner/plaintiff to cultivate his lands. The respondents/defendants obstructed the petitioner from carrying out agricultural operations on 19.06.2022 and on that the petitioner/plaintiff filed complaint, which was registered as a case in Crime No.42 of 2022 of Nagaligidda Police Station. On 07.07.2022 also the respondents/defendant caused obstruction to the petitioner/plaintiff in sowing, as such, a case in Crime No.130 of 2022 of Narayankhed Police Station was registered. The respondents/defendants have no manner of right to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner/plaintiff over suit lands. The respondents/defendants are not class - I heirs of father of the petitioner/plaintiff. The Court held that the suit schedule properties are self acquired properties. As the respondents/defendants have no rig