Telangana High Court
Parepalli Prakash And 4 Others vs Sagadam Venu And 2 Others on 5 December, 2022
Bench: Sambasivarao Naidu
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
CIVIL REVISION PETITION.No.2686 OF 2022
ORDER :
Being aggrieved by the order (docket order) of the
learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge who was placed in
charge as Principal Senior Civil Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri
District in I.A.No.1024 of 2022 in O.S.No.1931 of 2022
dated 10.08.2022 by which the trial Court ordered an
urgent notice in the interlocutory application filed by the
petitioner/plaintiff for temporary injunction, the present
revision has been filed on the following grounds:
The trial Court committed an error in passing an
order on 10.08.2022 without taking into consideration of
principles of natural justice probabilities of evidence and
material on record. The trial Court did not pass any orders
in their application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 to
restrain the respondents from alienating or creating any 3rd
party right over the property, but ordered an urgent notice
without considering the documents filed before the Court
below. The petitioners have claimed that the relief sought
for in the interlocutory application was an equitable
CRP No.2686 of 2022
remedy available to the petitioners who have been
subjected to fraud perpetrated by the 1st respondent who
got executed sale deed in his favour from the vendors of
late P.Chenamma in the year 1994 which is after execution
of sale deed in favour of late P.Chenamma from whom the
petitioners have acquired the title on the property.
2. The petitioners further claimed that the Court below
was well-apprised of the fact that the 1st respondent
without any right or title over the suit schedule property
already alienated the same to respondent Nos.2 and 3. But,
the Court below failed to take into consideration and failed
to pass any order. Therefore, according to the petitioners
even though they established prima facie case and in spite
of their apprehension that there will be further alienation of
the property, the Court below did not consider their
arguments and ordered urgent notice in the month of
August, 2022.
3. There is no progress in the interlocutory applications
for the past 4 months. The trial Court simply adjourning
the matter awaiting report from the Nazarat about the
service of summons to the respondents/defendants.
CRP No.2686 of 2022
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the
respondents/defendants successfully avoided the service of
notice and summons and the Court below simply
adjourned the matter from time to time.
4. Learned counsel while relying on judgment between
Smt. K.Vijaya Lakshmi vs G. Nageshwara Reddy and
others reported in 2014 SCC Online Hyd 684, argued that
the Court below ought to have disposed the injunction
petition or ought to have ordered temporary injunction so
as to preserve the situation.
5. In the above referred judgment, this Court observed
as under:
"Order 39 Rule 1 CPC enable the Court to grant
temporary injunction even without issuing notice
to the opposite party. The said provision has
been made with an intention to preserve the
property as it is. When any property in dispute in
a suit is in danger of being wasted, damaged or
alienated by any party to the suit, or whether the
defendant threatens or intends to remove or
dispose of his property with a view to defrauding
his creditors or where the defendant threatens to
dispossess the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury
to the plaintiff in relation to any property in
CRP No.2686 of 2022
dispute in the suit, the Court may grant a
temporary injunction. The plaintiff has to
establish prima facie case. It becomes the duty of
the Courts to examine whether there is any
urgency in the matter or not. The Court further
observed that the Courts should examine what is
reasonable time required to serve the notice
within two or three days. The matter need not be
adjourned to longer date."
6. With the above observations this Court disposed of
the above referred revision by observing that there is no
need to issue notice to the respondent in the revision and
revision can be disposed at the admission stage with
certain directions to the effect, directing the trial Court to
issue notice to the respondent or their counsel and
advance the matter to any date within a period of 7 days
from the date of receipt of copy of the order and hear the
matter within a period of (7) days thereafter, pass
appropriate orders in accordance with law and in the
meanwhile both parties were directed to maintain status
quo obtaining as on the date of order.
7. In the case on hand the suit was filed in the month
of August, 2022. The trial Court having heard the counsel
for the petitioner/plaintiff and obviously after verifying the
CRP No.2686 of 2022
affidavit filed in support of the petition ordered an urgent
notice. The record shows that subsequently the matter was
adjourned from time to time without any progress and as
evident from the copy of the docket proceedings, it seems
the notice/summons on the respondents were not served
thereby the interlocutory application is pending for the past
more that 3 months without any order.
8. In the light of what is argued by the counsel for the
petitioner and in view of the specific averments that
respondent no.1 has alienated the property to the
remaining respondent, there is possibility of creating some
more sale deeds even before they appeared in the suit
before the trial Court, the revision is disposed with the
same direction which was passed in the above referred
revision.
9. In the result, the revision is disposed of. Trial Court
is directed to issue notice to the respondents and advance
the matter to any nearer date and shall take all steps for
service of the notice and decide the interlocutory
application after giving liberty to both parties on merits.
The parties shall maintain status quo obtaining as on
CRP No.2686 of 2022
today till the disposal of the interlocutory application on
merits.
10. As a sequel, pending Miscellaneous Applications, if
any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________
JUSTICE SAMBASIVA RAO NAIDU
Date: 05.12.2022.
Pssk
