1
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.427 of 2023
ORDER:
This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner/defendant, challenging the order dated 20.04.2022 passed in I.A.No.229 of 2022 in O.S.No.241 of 2022 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam.
2. Heard Sri Surya Balu Mahendra, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant, Sri Krishna Kishore Kovvuri, learned counsel for respondent/plaintiff and perused the record.
3. The respondent/plaintiff filed the subject suit in O.S.No.281 of 2022 under Section 38 of Specific Relief Act read with Rule 44 of the Agency Rules, against the petitioner/defendant seeking perpetual injunction along with subject I.A.No.229 of 2022 seeking temporary injunction restraining the defendants or any other persons who are claiming through him, from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property, till the disposal of the main suit.
4. The Court below, vide impugned order dated 20.09.2022 granted ex-parte and temporary injunction restraining the petitioner/defendant , his henchmen, servants, agents or anybody 2 on his behalf from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant filed this Civil Revision Petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant would submit that the order under challenge is non-speaking order, cryptic, bereft of reasons and do withstand the test of judicial scrutiny. It is against the scope of intent of Order XXXIX Rule 2 of C.P.C. Without verifying the actual possession of the petition schedule land as on the date of filing of the subject suit, the Court below granted an ex parte temporary injunction. The impugned order is against the spirit of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shiv Kumar Chadha Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi1 and ultimately prayed to set aside the order under challenge and allow the Civil Revision Petition as prayed for.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff supported the impugned order and submitted that a well reasoned order was passed by the Court below. Only in order to protect the possession of the respondent/plaintiff over the petition schedule property, temporary injunction was granted. The order under challenge warrants no interference and ultimately prayed to dismiss the Civil Revision Petition.
1 (1993) 3 SSC 161 3
7. The impugned order, dated 20.09.2022 reads as follows:
"The respondent/defendant their henchmen, servants, agents or anybody on their behalf do hereby restrained from in anyway interfering with the petitioner/plaintiff peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property till further orders."
8. A perusal of the impugned order discloses that it is cryptic and bereft of reasons. It is incumbent upon the Court below, to advert to the pleadings, contentions, points involved and the legal position, if any, applicable, and then to record evidence supported by reasons on the points involved in the application. It is trite to observe that the need to give reasons has been held to arise out of the need to minimize the chances of arbitrariness and induce clarity. The reasons, apart from being essential feature of principles of natural justice, ensures transparency in decision making process. Reasons are indicative of application of mind and giving reasons is also essential when the order is amenable to further avenues of challenge. In the instant case, the Court below granted ex parte temporary injunction in a mechanical fashion without assigning any reasons. In Shiv Kumar Chadha (1 supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court held that even for passing an ex parte injunction order, the Court must assign reasons. Viewed thus, the impugned order is against the spirit of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the 4 decision cited supra. Under these circumstances, the petitioner/defendant has no other remedy except to approach this Court under Article 227 of Constitution of India by filing the present Civil Revision Petition, as the order was based on an application filed under Rule 44 of the Agency rules and against such orders, this Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of Constitution of India, is maintainable before this Court. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Court below for disposal of the subject I.A. afresh, after affording opportunity of hearing to both parties.
9. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 20.09.2022 passed in I.A.No.229 of 2022 in O.S.No.241 of 2022 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam. The matter is remitted to the Court below with a direction to dispose of the subject I.A.No.229 of 2022 afresh, in accordance with law, by considering the provisions laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shiv Kumar Chadha's case (1 supra), after affording opportunity to both the parties to advance their submissions within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, both the parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the possession of the suit schedule land, which course would subserve the ends of justice. 5
Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this Criminal Revision Case shall stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________ JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J Date: 28.04.2023 Dgr 6 THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI Civil Revision Petition No.427 of 2023 Date: 28.04.2023 dgr