HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY CIVIL REVISION PETITION.No.530 of 2025

ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition is filed aggrieved by the docket order dated 03.09.2022 and subsequent dates i.e., 17.11.2022 to 29.11.2024 in I.A.No.417 of 2022 in O.S.No.113 of 2022 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, at Thungaturthy.

2. Heard, Sri. Padala Pravin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Srikrishna, learned counsel for the respondents.

3. Petitioner herein is plaintiff and respondents herein are defendants in the suit.

4. Petitioner herein filed suit in O.S.No.113 of 2022 against the respondents for perpetual injunction along with an application for ad-interim injunction vide I.A.No.417 of 2022 restraining the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property. Initially, application was taken up for hearing on 03.09.2022 and the matter was adjourned from time to time at the request of respondent for counter without passing any orders. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is owner of the suit schedule property and is in exclusive possession and enjoyment of suit schedule property wherein petitioner is growing mango trees and respondents with the support of their henchmen are trying to interfere with the possession of the petitioners and also threatening to occupy the same. In those circumstances, the petitioner approached the trial Court for perpetual injunction along with the application vide I.A.No.417 of 2022. It is further submitted that the trial Court is not taking up the application for adjudication and taking advantage of the same, the respondents are interfering with possession of petitioner in respect of suit schedule property and thus prayed that trial Court may be directed to dispose of the application by fixing time frame and until such time, the possession of petitioner may be protected.

6. A perusal of the docket orders clearly reflects that the application was being adjourned at the request of learned counsel for the respondents for counter and the application has not been heard till date though, the same is filed in the year 2022. It is the specific case of the petitioner that taking advantage non-disposal of interim application, the respondents are interfering with the possession of the petitioner’s suit schedule property. In considered view of this Court, the trial Court ought to have taken up the application and decided the same on its own merits instead of adjourning, otherwise the whole purpose of filing an application for ad-interim injunction would be defeated. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present revision petition can be disposed with a direction to the trial Court.

7. In view of the above discussion, facts and circumstances of the case, civil revision petition is disposed of and the trial Court shall make an endeavor to dispose of the I.A.No.417 of 2022 in O.S.No.113 of 2022 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order on its own merits by duly affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: 30.07.2025 Bw