Injunctions cannot be granted against co-owners in partition suits; however, maintaining Status-Quo is reasonable to prevent interference during ongoing disputes.

JUDGMENT :

P. Sree Sudha, J.

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Order dated 28.11.2024 in I.A.No.423 of 2024 in O.S.No.364 of 2024 passed by the learned XI-Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

2. Respondents/plaintiffs have filed an application vide I.A.No.423 of 2024 in O.S.No.364 of 2024, against the appellants/defendants, for granting of ad-interim injunction restraining the appellants/defendants and their men from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment over the petition ‘B’ schedule property, pending disposal of the suit. The trial Court after considering the arguments of both sides and also the evidence on record, allowed the application. Aggrieved by the said Order, respondents therein/appellants preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

3. The learned Counsel for the appellants/defendants mainly contended that respondents/plaintiffs have filed the suit for partition and separate possession, as such the question of granting injunction in their favour does not arise. The trial Court has wrongly concluded the entries made in the revenue records as family division (Kutumba Vibhajana) under Ex.P75. He also contended that respondents/plaintiffs have pleaded themselves that suit schedule properties are not partitioned in the plaint and Ex.R5, but the trial Court wrongly concluded the same. Moreover, the entries made in Exs.P53 to P65 and Ex.P75 are misunderstood. The trial Court passed the Order without going through Exs.R1 to R8, as such it is liable to be set aside. He further contended that the trial Court passed the injunction Order against the co-owner. The trial Court erroneously gave the finding that respondents/plaintiffs are in separate possession of the suit schedule ‘B’ property, pending disposal of the suit. Therefore, requested the Court to set aside the impugned Order passed by the trial Court.

4. Heard arguments of both sides and perused the entire evidence on record.

5. Parties herein are referred to as plaintiffs and defendants as arrayed before the trial Court in O.S.No.364 of 2024, for the sake of convenience.

6. Initially, plaintiffs have filed a suit vide O.S.No.364 of 2024, for partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property by demarcating their entire extent of land admeasuring Acs.10 – 26 gts including an extent of Acs.8 – 25 gts (mentioned as suit – B Schedule property) out of Acs.14 – 14 gts and also requested the Court to appoint Advocate Commissioner and to grant permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the suit B-Schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, plaintiffs have filed an application vide I.A.No.423 of 2024 in O.S.No.364 of 2024, for grant of injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit B-Schedule property, pending disposal of the suit. Plaintiffs No.1 to 19 are represented by their GPA holder Bhumireddy Venkata Malikarjuna Reddy, plaintiffs No.22 to 31 are represented by their GPA holder M/s.Ashoka League Projects and plaintiffs No.20 to 21 and 32 to 35 are represented in their individual capacity. Defendants No.2 and 3 are son and wife of defendant No.1. The family pedigree is illustrated as follows:

7. The brief facts of the case are that originally the lands in Sy.Nos.15, 16, 17, 20, 22 and 23 together admeasuring Acs.14-14 gts belongs to one late Kista Reddy and late Chenna Reddy, who are brothers and later their legal heirs names were entered into the revenue records as per the ROR Act and ROR rules and individual pattadar passbooks and title deeds were also issued in their favour prior to the year 1990.

8. As per the family pedigree, L.Kista Reddy branch is entitled to an extent of Acs.7 – 07 gts. As L.Kista Reddy is having two sons namely L.Chandra Reddy and L.Ram Reddy, they are entitled to Acs.3 – 23 gts each out of Acs.7 – 07 gts. The land of Chandra Reddy is divided among his