SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 12341

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. LAKSHMAN, J
Shanagonda Sampath – Appellant
Versus
Shanagonda Akhila – Respondent
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2536 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri B.Jagadish
For the Respondents: Sri R.Dayakar

Civil Courts have the inherent authority to grant police aid for enforcing injunctions when violations are alleged, provided the petitioners are unable to substantiate their claims of possession against a valid injunction order.

Headnote:(A) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 151 - Police aid - Civil Revision Petition challenges an order granting police aid to respondents for enforcing an injunction against petitioners - Petitioners alleged that they have been cultivating the suit land for over 30 years - Trial Court found respondents in possession and granted police aid to safeguard the injunction - Court highlighted that, without a proper appeal against the injunction order, petitioners' claims of possession were not valid. (Paras 5, 7, 12, 16, 48)

(B) Injunctions - Enforcement - Civil Courts have inherent power under Section 151 of CPC to grant police aid for the enforcement of injunctions where violation is alleged, provided specific findings of possession favor the applicant. (Paras 18, 19, 44)

(C) Parameters for Granting Police Aid - Must be critical necessity for implementation of injunction orders; disputes of fact should not be arbitrarily resolved by police intervention. The court emphasized the need for courts to set standards for determining when police intervention for enforcement is warranted. (Paras 48, 49)

Findings of Court:
The Court affirmed the lower court's order granting police aid, establishing that violations of injunction orders can necessitate police intervention to uphold judicial orders effectively.

Issues: Key questions included the validation of respondents' possession under the injunction order and the entitlements for police assistance amid ongoing civil disputes.

Ratio Decidendi: The ruling established that alleged violations not subject to appeal allow for police aid to ensure compliance with existing judicial orders, thereby reinforcing the integrity of the justice system.

Result: Civil Revision Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. introduction of civil revision petition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. details of the injunction and its contest. (Para 4 , 5)
3. arguments of petitioners and respondents. (Para 6 , 10 , 11)
4. court observations on compliance with injunction. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 12 , 13)
5. precedential history regarding police aid. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
6. parameters and guidelines for granting police aid. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
7. judgments reinforcing police aid standards. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
8. clarifications on police aid provisions. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
9. final reiteration of police aid principles. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38)
10. understanding high court’s powers related to police aid. (Para 39 , 40)

ORDER

Heard Sri B.Jagadish, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.Dayakar, learned counsel appearing for respondents.

2. The present Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the order dated 28.03.2024 passed in I.A.No.150 of 2022 in I.A.No.172 of 2021 in O.S.No.428 of 2021 by the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, at Karimnagar.

3. Respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit vide O.S.No.428 of 2024 against the petitioners herein/defendants for perpetual injunction restraining the petitioners herein from interfering with their possession over the suit schedule property i.e. the land admeasuring Ac.0.12½ guntas in Sy.No.465K belongs to the 1st plaintiff/1st respondent herein and the land to the extent of 0.02 ½ gutnas in Sy.No.465M/B and Ac.0.10guntas in Sy.No.465K and in total Ac.0.12½ guntas situated at Mallapur Village shivar of Thimmapur Mandal, Karimnagar District (for short, ‘the subject property’). Along with the said suit, they have also filed I.A.No.172 of 2021 seeking ad-interim injunction. Vide order dated 06.09.2021, learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar, granted interim injunction in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs against the petitioners herein/defendants restraining the petitioners herein from interfering with the possession of the respondents/plaintiffs over the suit schedule property.

4. It is apt to note that the said order dated 06.10.2021 in I.A.No.172 of 2021 in O.S.No.428 of 2021 is a contest order on consideration of the counter filed by the petitioners herein/defendants herein and on hearing both sides. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners herein have preferred an appeal vide CMA (SR) No.78 of 2024. It appears there is delay in preferring the said appeal. Therefore, the petitioners have filed I.A.No.1345 of 2024 to condone the delay in preferring the said appeal and the said Interlocutory Application is still pending.

5. The respondents/plaintiffs filed I.A.No.150 of 2022 in I.A.No.172 of 2021 in O.S.No.428 of 2021 under Section 151 of CPC to grant police aid on the following grounds:-

i. Vide order dated 06.09.2021 in I.A.No.172 of 2021 in O.S.No.428 of 2021 learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Karimnagar granted temporary injunction restraining the petitioners herein/defendants from interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule property.

ii. It is a contest order.

iii. No appeal was preferred challenging the said order.

iv. The petitioners herein/defendants and their parents interfering with the possession of the respondent/plaintiffs over the subject property and disturbing their possession. Therefore, they have lodged a complaint with the Police, LMD Colony, Thimmapur, who in turn, registered a case in Cr.No.15 of 2021. They have also furnished a copy of the aforesaid order to the police. They are not taking action stating that the dispute is civil in nature. v. By taking advantage of the same, the petitioners/defendants and their parents perpetrating their illegal activities against the respondents/plaintiffs by not permitting them to enter into the suit schedule property for cultivation. Therefore, they sought police aid.

6. The said application was opposed by the petitioners herein/defendants contending as follows:-

i.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top