ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.4 in not taking any action on the application of the petitioner dt.20.10.2019 sent through register post for grant of police aid to implement the interim injunction order passed in I.A.No.791 of 2002 in O.S.No.348 of 2002 dt.29.10.2002 passed by the learned I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to extend the police aid to implement the interim injunction order passed in in I.A.No.791 of 2002 in O.S.No.348 of 2002 dt.29.10.2002 passed by the learned I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar, and pass..”

2. None appeared for the petitioner.

3. Heard Mr.B.Sridhar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents.

4.1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that the representation dated 20.10.2019 submitted by the petitioner seeks implementation of the interim injunction order passed in I.A. No.791 of 2002 in O.S. No.348 of 2002 on the file of the Court of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. It is contended that, in the absence of any specific direction issued by the competent Civil Court directing extension of police protection or police aid, the respondent police authorities could not have independently acted upon the petitioner’s representation. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that, if the petitioner was aggrieved by the alleged violation or non-implementation of the interim injunction order, the proper and efficacious remedy available to him was to approach the concerned Civil Court by invoking the statutory mechanisms provided under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

4.2. It is further contended that the law on the issue is well settled that a party seeking enforcement of a decree, order of temporary injunction, or any interim direction granted by a Civil Court must necessarily approach the same Court or the Executing Court and without exhausting the statutory remedies available under civil procedural law, invocation of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction for implementation of a civil court injunction order is ordinarily impermissible and not maintainable in law. On the aforesaid grounds, dismissal of the writ petition is sought.

5. I have carefully perused the material available on record and considered the submissions advanced on either side.

6. The principal grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent police authorities failed to take action on the representation submitted by him despite the subsistence of an interim injunction order granted by a competent Civil Court. However, as rightly contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the legal position governing the maintainability of such writ petitions is no longer res integra.

7. A Division Bench of this Court in Kabbakula Padma v. State of Telangana, (2023) 1 ALT 765, categorically held that where a party seeks implementation or enforcement of a decree or interim order passed by a Civil Court, the appropriate remedy is to approach the concerned Civil Court or the Executing Court by initiating appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. The Division Bench observed that the Civil Court possesses ample powers under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, including under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A CPC, Order XXI CPC, and Section 151 CPC, to enforce its orders and, where circumstances so warrant, to grant police aid for effective implementation of its orders. The Court further clarified that entertaining a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for direct enforcement of civil court orders would amount to bypassing the statutory framework specifically enacted for enfo