THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.222 of 2024 JUDGMENT:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY Heard Mr.Shyam S Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant. Perused the material available on record.

2. The present is a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal which has been filed under Order 43 Rule (r) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short C.P.C) assailing the order dated 26.03.2024, passed in I.A.No.580 of 2015, in O.S.No.118 of 2015, by the XXV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

3. Vide the said impugned order, the court below has dismissed the injunction petition filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of the C.P.C., in a suit which was filed as early as in the year 2015.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appellant submits that the suit was filed for declaration of title and injunction against the respondents/defendants. The suit was initially taken up for hearing on 16.03.2015, on which date upon taking necessary cognizance of the suit, the court below granted an ad interim injunction on a petition filed under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2. The said interim injunction continued to remained in operation from the year 2015 till the impugned order is passed on

26.03.2024, i.e., for almost nine (09) years.

5. It has also been informed by the learned counsel for the appellant down the line, the suit has also proceeded and meanwhile the evidence of plaintiff has also been recorded. At this juncture, there was no such necessity for having vacated the interim order much to the detriment of the petitioner. Rather, the court below could have proceeded with the suit itself on merits and when the suit itself now stands at the advance stage of trial.

6. In the absence of any representation on behalf of the respondents, we are of the considered opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal pending for indefinite period particularly, taking note of the fact that the appellant herein has already an interim order in his favour by this Court vide order dated 25.04.2024. It would rather be in the larger interest of both the appellants and the respondents to get the suit itself decided on its own merits. Rather than, letting the suit pending consideration on the I.As., inspite of the fact that the suit is pending for almost a decade now.

7. We therefore, dispose of the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal at this juncture, with a clear direction that since there was already an order of status quo that was granted in June-2015, which remained in operation till the impugned order was passed, no substantial prejudice would be caused to the interest of the respondents, if the order of status quo continues till the final order is passed. Moreover, since the suit itself is now pending for decision for more than nine years before the trial court and the evidence of the plaintiffs having commenced, establishes the fact that the suit has reached at an advance stage, therefore, let the suit itself be decided as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of six (06) months.

8. Meanwhile, let status quo as it exist today so far as the suit schedule property be maintained by all the parties.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

____________________

P.SAM KOSHY, J ____________________________ SAMBASI VA RAO NAI DU, J Date: 24.07.2024 AQS