##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:3687

APHC010619882025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3163]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 3253/2025

Between:

1. SMT PURRE VIJYA KALAVATHI, W/O VENKATA RAMANA, AGED

ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO. 20-04-85A, BASAVA TARAKA

NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN -

520003.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. MEKATHOTI RAVI KUMAR, S/O LATE GEORGE, AGED ABOUT 39

YEARS, R/O D.NO.20-04-115, BASAVA TARAKA NAGAR,

VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN - 520003.

2. MEKATHOTI RAJU KUMAR, S/O LATE GEORGE, AGED ABOUT 37

YEARS, R/O D.NO.20-04-115, BASAVA TARAKA NAGAR,

VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN -

520003

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying that in the

circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be

pleased to allow the CRP by setting aside the Order dated 13.10.2025 passed

in I.A. No.191 of 2025 in A.S. No.161 of 2025 on the file of the of Court of V

Additional District Judge, Vijayawada and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to

2

2C0M26R:A,JP HC:3687

C.R.P.No.3253 of 2025

grant stay of all further proceedings dated 21-07-2025 in O.S.No.96 of 2018

on the file of III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Vijayawada, pending

disposal of the CRP and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. CH S S V PRASAD

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. Y.S.VIJAYA PRATAP

3

2C0M26R:A,JP HC:3687

C.R.P.No.3253 of 2025

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

Aggrieved by the order dated 13.10.2025 passed in I.A.No.191 of 2025

in A.S.No.161 of 2025, whereby, the petition filed under Order 41 Rule 5 of

Code of Civil Procedure for grant of stay of the decree and judgment in

O.S.No.96 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division),

Vijayawada was dismissed, the present revision petition is preferred by the

petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Inspite of granting several

adjournments, the respondents are not turning up for hearing in this revision

petition. Therefore, the revision petition is being disposed of, on merits, as per

the material available on record, after hearing the petitioner.

3. The revision petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.96 of 2018 on the file

of the III Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vijayawada. The said suit

was filed for permanent injunction against her. After trial, the suit was decreed

against her. Aggrieved thereby, she has preferred an appeal to the Court of V

Additional District Judge, Vijayawada. Along with the appeal, she has filed an

application under Order 41 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking stay of

execution of the decree and the judgment of the trial Court. The trial Court

dismissed the said petition by the impugned order. The revision petitioner,

who is the defendant in the suit, categorically admits at the time of hearing the

revision petition that she is not in possession of the suit schedule property.

However, her grievance is only relating to the pathway which is adjacent to

her residential house. Therefore, when she is not in possession of the suit

schedule property, and when the plaintiffs were found to be in possession of

the suit schedule property, prima facie, this Court finds no legal flaw or

infirmity in the impugned judgment and decree of the trial Court. Therefore,

the Appellate Court rightly dismissed the stay petition filed by her.

4

2C0M26R:A,JP HC:3687

C.R.P.No.3253 of 2025

4. However, as it is pleaded that by virtue of that injunction decree, the

plaintiffs in the suit are interfering with the pathway which is adjacent to the

residential house of the petitioner/defendant, this Court is of the considered

view that a direction is required to be given to the Appellate Court to