THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR REVIEW PETITION No. 01 OF 2020 IN CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 2516 of 2019 AND CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.146 of 2021

COMMON ORDER

Since the Review Petition No. 01 of 2020 in CRP No.2516 of 2019 and CRP No.146 of 2021 revolve around a common issue, they were heard together.

2. The Review Petition under Order XLVII of Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘CPC’) is filed seeking review of the order dated 17.02.2020 passed by this Court in CRP No.2516 of 2019.

3. Civil Revision Petition No.146 of 2021 is filed aggrieved by docket order dated 07.01.2021 in I.A. No. 510 of 2018 in I.A.No.208 of 2018 in O.S.No.387 of 2018 on the file VIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy district at L.B.Nagar.

4. The petitioner herein is petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition vide CRP No.2516 of 2019.

5. The factual matrix of the case has been set out in detail in the order under challenge. Thus, shorn of unnecessary details it is sufficient to state that the petitioner herein had filed the underlying petition aggrieved by the order dated 17.02.2020 passed by this Court in CRP No. 2516 of 2019.

6. CRP No.2516 of 2019 was filed assailing the order of trial Court and appellate Court by claiming that the Court below did not consider the attachment of property under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A CPC while setting aside the order of one-month civil prison; that the Court did not consider the fact that there is no pleading or finding in respect of the willful disobedience or breach of the trial Court order holding her to be in breach of the order passed by the trial Court.

7. This Court had disposed of the CRP No. 2516 of 2019 by directing the petitioner to bring down the illegal construction made in the suit schedule property after passing the injunction order dated 02.05.2018 in I.A. No. 208 of 2018 to show her bonafide’s and tender unconditional apology within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, failing which the order dated 18.09.2019 in C.M.A. No.70 of 2019 passed by the XIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, confirming the order dated 13.08.2018 in 1.A. No.510 of 2018 in I.A. No.208 of 2018 in O.S.

No.387 of 2018 shall stand affirmed and the petitioner shall be detained in civil prison for a period of one month.

8. This Court while disposing the CRP by placing reliance on the Advocate Commissioner’s report and the trial Court’s finding in paragraph 8 of the injunction order, recording that construction was at the pillar stage, had held that the trial Court has rightly concluded that the petitioner continued construction despite the injunction order dated 02.05.2018, and being restrained to proceed with work pending disposal of the suit.

9. This Court further affirmed the trial Court’s finding that the petitioner had acted in violation of the said order and found no grounds to interfere, and rejected the petitioner’s claim of having stopped construction on 01.05.2018, noting that such a plea was disproved by the existence of a completed ground + five-storey structure.

10. The present review petition is filed seeking review of the order of this Court in CRP No.2516 of 2019

11. Civil Revision Petition No.146 of 2021 is filed aggrieved by the warrant of arrest dated 07.01.2021 issued in pursuance to the order passed in I.A. No.510 of 2018 in O.S. No. 387 of 2018 having been confirmed by this Court in CRP No.2516 of 2019.

12. The trial Court issued warrant of arrest against the respondent for detention in civil imprisonment, for not complying the directions issued even after giving sufficient time to comply the same vide order dated 07.02.2020.

13. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.

14. Petitioners in Review Petition contend that the trial Court and appellate Court ought to have considered attachment of property instead of ordering petitioner to be detained in civil prison for one month under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC.

15. I