Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 14319
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J
SMT MIDATHADA (DASARI) LEELA – Appellant
Versus
SRI MIDATHADA CHALLA DALAMMA JAYANTHI YERRAYYAMMA – Respondent
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1812/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: JADA SRAVAN KUMAR
For the Respondents:
Courts must expedite injunction applications to prevent third-party rights interference.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Civil Procedure Code - Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 - Petition to direct Family Court for expeditious disposal of interlocutory application regarding temporary injunction - Delay in granting an ad-interim injunction risks third-party rights - Court directed expeditious handling of the interlocutory application in accordance with law. (Paras 3, 7, 8)
(B) Application for Temporary Injunction - Requirement of prompt consideration to prevent potential alienation of property - Petitioners demonstrate concern over the risk of alienation affecting their rights in the property. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners filed a suit for partition and applied for a temporary injunction, which has delayed and risks the rights of the petitioners if the property is alienated.
Findings of Court:
The Court directed the Principal District Judge to dispose of the interlocutory application at the earliest.
Issues: Delay in addressing the temporary injunction application could jeopardize the petitioners' rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the urgency in handling applications for temporary injunctions to safeguard the rights of the petitioners against alienation.
Result: Civil Revision Petition disposed of with directions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing for partition and injunction to protect property rights. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court directs timely disposal to prevent rights infringement. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. case disposed with no costs order. (Para 8) |
The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed duly praying to direct the Family Court at Vizianagaram to dispose of Interlocutory Application No.276 of 2025 in Original Suit No.13 of 2025 on its file as expeditiously as possible.
2. Heard Sri Karthik Shah, learned counsel, representing Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in elaboration to what has been stated in the grounds of revision, submitted that the petitioners/plaintiffs filed a suit against the respondents/defendants vide O.S. No.13 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court at Vizianagaram for partition. Along with the said suit, the plaintiffs/petitioners filed I.A.No.276 of 2025 under Order XXXIX rules 1 and 2 CPC for grant of ex parte temporary injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property till the disposal of the suit. In the said application, the Court below ordered only notice, however did not pass any ad-interim injunction. In the meantime, if the respondents/defendants alienates the suit schedule property or part of the schedule property, it not only creates third party interest, but also the rights of the petitioners will be affected and the purpose of filing the said application will be defeated, as such, prayed this Court to give a direction to the Court below to dispose of the said application at the earliest.
4. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. The petitioners being the plaintiffs filed suit vide O.S.No.13 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Principal District Judge at Vizianagaram for partition. Along with the said suit, they filed I.A.No.276 of 2025 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction. Perusal of the record shows that the Court below had ordered notice in March 2025, however, the matter continues to be listed under the caption ‘Summons.’
6. Since no positive direction has sought in this Revision, this Court feels it unnecessary to issue notice to the respondents.
7. Taking the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners into consideration, there is some force in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that if the application for temporary injunction was not taken up for consideration at the earliest, the purpose of filing the said application would be defeated. Keeping the same in view, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Civil Revision Petition with the following direction.
The court below i.e., learned Principal District Judge at Vizianagaram is directed to dispose of Interlocutory Application No.276 of 2025 in Original Suit No.13 of 2025 on its file at the earliest, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing the parties concerned.
8. With the above direction, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
