ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the revision petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 02.02.2023 passed in I.A.No.46 of 2020 in O.S.No.21 of 2018 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Huzurabad.

2. I.A.No.46 of 2020 is filed under Section 151 of CPC by the petitioner/plaintiff praying the Court to direct the SHO, Veenavanka, to give police aid to the petitioner/plaintiff for implementation of injunction order in I.A.No.67 of 2018 to protect the rights of the petitioner/plaintiff.

3. The contention of the petitioner/plaintiff in I.A.No.46 of 2020 is that the main suit i.e., O.S.No.21 of 2018 is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff seeking relief of perpetual injunction against respondent/defendant in respect of the suit schedule property.

Along with the suit, the petitioner/plaintiff has also filed an I.A.No.67 of 2018 to grant temporary injunction to restrain the respondent/defendant from interfering with the petitioner’s possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule property. The trial Court granted interim injunction on 17.12.2018 in I.A.No.67 of 2018. Inspite of the injunction order granted by the trial Court in I.A.No.67 of 2018 the respondent/defendant on 20.11.2019 trespassed into the petitioner/plaintiff land in the night hours with the help of harvester and had cut away the paddy crop to an extent of Ac.1-02 gts., and when the petitioner/plaintiff came to know, he along with Sripathi Papanna, went to the suit land and resisted, but the respondent/defendant abused him in filthy language and committed theft of paddy about 40 bags, for which the petitioner/plaintiff reported the matter to Veenavanka police station to take suitable action against the respondent/defendant however, they refused to take action against him. As the respondent/defendant is taking law into his hands, the petitioner/plaintiff filed the I.A.No.46 of 2020 and prayed the Court to grant police aid to him.

4. The respondent/defendant filed counter resisting the petition and contended that he preferred CMA.No.1 of 2019 before Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Huzurabad in which he filed an IA to stay the execution of order and decree dated 17.12.2018 passed in I.A.No.67 of 2018 and the same is pending for disposal and during the pendency of CMA, the police aid petition is not maintainable.

Therefore, prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

5. After hearing both sides and considering the averments made in the petition and in the counter affidavit, the trial Court refused to grant the police aid stating that no evidence was adduced by the petitioner/plaintiff in support of the alleged interference by way of trespass into the suit schedule property and theft of 40 bags of paddy crop by respondent/defendant. As such, the trial Court dismissed the petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present CRP is filed by the revision petitioner.

6. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Madisetty, learned counsel for the revision petitioner and there is no representation on behalf of the respondent/defendant.

7. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner/plaintiff submits that even after the trial Court granted the injunction order in I.A.No.67 of 2018 in favour of the petitioner/plaintiff, the respondent/defendant interfered with the possession of the property and he came to property with a harvester and committed theft of 40 bags of paddy crop. Therefore, the revision petitioner filed police protection petition i.e., I.A.No.46 of 2020 under Section 151 CPC, but the trial Court failed to consider the same and dismissed the said I.A. stating that no evidence is placed on record of the alleged trespass and theft. Therefore, the revision petitioner prayed this Court to set aside the order of the trial Court and allow the revision petition.

8. Having gone through the submissions of learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the material placed on record, the incident has occurred on 20.11.2