Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Challa Sivarami Reddy, ... vs Bandi Subbarayudu, Y.S.R.Dist ... on 4 February, 2022
[ 3305 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER,
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
:PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
TA. No. 1 of 2020
IN
ASMP No. 1106 OF 2017
IN
AS NO: 461 OF 2017
IA. No. 1 of 2020
Between:
1. Bandi Subbarayudu, S/o. Tiurumalaiah, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Balijapalle Village,
Mamillapalle, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Y.S.R.District.
2. Bandi Tirumalaiah, S/o. Subbarayudu, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Balijapalle Village,
Mamillapalle, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Y.S.R. District.
...Petitioners/Respondents in
ASMP.No.1106 of 2017
(Respondents in AS. No. 461 of 2017
on the file of High Court)
AND
Challa Sivarami Reddy, S/o. Gangi Reddy, Occ: Business, R/o. Peddamusalreddypalle
Village, H/o. Mamillapalli Village, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Y.S.R.District.
Respondent/Petitioner
(Respondent-in-do-)
Petition under Section 151 of CPC, praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated
09-08-2017 which is made absolute by order dated 12-09-2017 in ASMP.No. 1106 of
2017 on this High Court and dismiss the petition.
ASMP No. 1106 OF 2017
Between:
Challa Sivarami Reddy, S/o. Gangi Reddy, Occ: Business, R/o. Peddamusalreddypalle
Village, H/o. Mamillapalli Village, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Y.S.R. District.
. Appellant/Plaintiff
(Appellant in AS 461 OF 2017
on the file of High Court)
AND .
1. Bandi Subbarayudu, S/o. Tiurumalaiah, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Balijapalle Village,
Mamillapalle, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Y.S.R. District.
2. Bandi Tirumalaiah, S/o. Subbarayudu, Occ: Cultivation, R/o. Balijapalle Village,
Mamillapalle, C.K.Dinne Mandal, Y.S.R. District.
...Respondents/Defendants
(Respondents in-do-)
Petition under Order 39 Rule 1 of CPC, praying that in the circumstances stated
in the affidavit filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to grant an injunction
restraining the respondents from creating the third party rights over the petition
schedule property in O.S.No.23 of 2011 on the file of the Court of the IV Additional
District Judge, Kadapa Y.S.R. District, pending disposal of AS. No. 461 of 2017 on the
file of High Court.
Schedule
Kadapa District, Kadapa Sub-District, C.K. Dinne Mandal, Mamillapalle Village
Panchayath, Balijapalle Village, Polam, Sircar Punji D.No.504/2 an extent of Ac.8.00
cents out of Ac.9.04 cents bounded by:
East : Forest Land/Hill
West : Land in the same S.No. Buggavanka Kalava and Land of Boggulolla Krishna
Reddy.
North: D.K.T. Land of Dabba Subbanna.
South: Forest land/Hill.
(As mentioned in the agreement of sale, dated 22-02-2007)
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit
filed herein and Order of High Court dated 12-09-2017 made in ASMP.No. 1106 of 2017
and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V R REDDY KOVVURI Advocate for the
Appellant in ASMP.No. 1106 of 2017 and Respondent in IA. No. 1 of 200 and
Sri SUREPALLI MADHAVA RAO, Advocate for the Respondents in ASMP.No. 1106 of
2017 and Petitioners in IA. No. 1 of 2020, the Court made the following
ORDER:
The present petition came to be filed by the petitioners/Respondents/ Defendants to
vacate the interim order dated 09.08.2017.
Sri S.Madhava Rao, learned counsel for petitioners/respondents, submits that
neither plaint nor the order satisfies the requirements of Section 16(C) of the Specific Relief
Act. He further pleads that the petitioners/respondents has deposited substantial amount
before the Court, but however, submits that they are not willing to execute the sale deed as
per the judgment dated 25.07.2016.
On the other hand, Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for
respondent/appellant, submits that the interim order was made absolute on 12.09.2017 and
if the Court vacates the same at this stage, nothing survives for adjudication in the main
appeal. He took us to paragraphs 6 and 8 of the plaint and submits that there was sufficient
compliance of Section 16(C) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
It is to be noted here that, on 09.08.2017, this Court passed an order directing
petitioners/ respondents not to create any third party rights on the property in dispute.
Subsequently, the said order was made absolute on 12.09.2017, when the petitioners/
respondents refused to receive the notices, holding that it amounts to deemed service of
notice under law. Thereafter, the present application is filed.
Taking into consideration the facts in issue and having regard to the interim order
passed in the month of August, 2017, which was made absolute in the month of September,
2017, we feel that it is not a fit case to vacate the interim order at this stage. Having regard
to the issue in question and since substantial amount has been deposited by the
petitioners/respondents plaintiff in the Court, registry to list the appeal for final hearing
immediately after Pongal Vacation, 2022.
Meanwhile, Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for respondent /appellant,
shall prepare the booklet and furnish a copy of the same to the leaned counsel for
petitioners/ respondents prior to the date of hearing.
List on 17.01.2022.
Sd/- K. Tata Rao
DEPUTY REGIST
IITRUE COPY//
To,
The IV Additional District Judge, Kadapai Y.S.R. District,
One CC to Sri. VR Reddy Kovvuri Advocate [OPUC]
One CC to Sri. Surepalli Madhava Rao, Advocate [OPUC]
One spare copy
PONS
Note: Correction of a typographical error as "Petitioners/Respondents" in place of
"Respondent/Appellant" in unnumbered Paragraph Nos 2 and 5 in Order dated 7-12-2021
in IA. No. 1 of 2020 in AS. No. 461 of 2017 as per Court Order dated 04-02-2022 in IA. No.
Substitute this Order dated 7-12-2021 which was already dispatched on 15-12-2021.
Sdi/- K. Tata Rao
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
HIGH COURT
CPKJ &
RNTJ
DATED:07/12/2021
ov 02/2022_
ORDER
EA Loft AOAR
mm
LA. No. 1 of 2020
IN
ASMP. No. 1106 of 2017
IN
AS.No.461 of 2017
DIRECTION
