Telangana High Court
Ponna Krishna Reddy vs The State Of Telangana And 11 ... on 23 March, 2023
Bench: B.Vijaysen Reddy
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.7958 OF 2023
ORDER : (ORAL)
The writ petition is filed seeking to declare action of
respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not providing police protection to the
petitioner and his property to an extent of Ac.2.0 guntas in Sy.
No.6/E and Ac.2.09 guntas in Sy. No.22/E situated at
Chinnareddyguda Village, Jilled Chowdarigudem Mandal,
Rangareddy District, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard Sri Ponna Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for
Home and perused the material available on record.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that suit for perpetual injunction in O.S. No.303 of 2022 was filed
before the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sahdnagar in respect of the
subject property. Interim injunction order granted in favour of the
petitioner in I.A. No.767 of 2022. Later, petitioner filed I.A.
No.1725 of 2022 and it is coming for counter of respondent Nos.5
to 12 - defendants. Complaint dated 19.01.2023 was lodged by the
petitioner requesting the Station House Officer, Jilled
Chowdarigudem to provide police protection.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home
submitted that in view of judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court dated 13.02.2023 in W.A. No.187 of 2023, the Writ petition
is liable to be dismissed. In paragraph Nos.14 to 17 following
observations are made by the learned Division Bench.
"14. Rule 2A of Order XXXIX of CPC reads as under:
2A. Consequence of disobedience or breach of injunction.
(1) In the case of disobedience of any injunction granted or other order made under rule
1 or rule 2 or breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the
order made, the Court granting the injunction or making the order, or any Court to
which the suit or proceeding is transferred, may order the property of the person guilty
of such disobedience or breach to be attached, and may also order such person to be
detained in the civil prison for a term not exceeding three months, unless in the
meantime the Court directs his release.
(2) No attachment made under this rule shall remain in force for more than one year,
at the end of which time if the disobedience or breach continues, the property attached
may be sold and out of the proceeds, the Court may award such compensation as it
thinks fit to the injured party and shall pay the balance, if any, to the party entitled
thereto.
15. From the above, it is evident that if there is any disobedience to an
order of injunction made under Rule 1 or Rule 2 of Order XXXIX CPC or
breach of any of the terms on which the injunction was granted or the order
made, the Court granting injunction or any court to which the suit or proceeding
is transferred may order the property of the person guilty of such disobedience or
breach to be attached and may also order such person to be detained in civil
prison for a term not exceeding three months unless in the meantime, the Court
directs his release. Therefore, Rule 2A of Order XXXIX CPC provides for
an adequate and efficacious remedy to a person who is aggrieved by disobedience
to or breach of an injunction order granted in his favour.
16. That being so, we are of the view that petitions filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of India seeking police aid to enforce or implement an
order of injunction or to restrain persons from interfering with the order of
injunction should not be ordinarily entertained unless an element of injury to the
public or infraction of statute is made out. Otherwise, it would amount to
entering into an arena of private dispute(s).
17. Accordingly, granting liberty to the appellants to avail their remedy
under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC, the writ appeal is dismissed."
5. In view of the above, in the opinion of this Court, writ
petition is not maintainable in any event petitioner is already
invoked alternate remedy by filing application under Section 151
of the C.P.C. in I.A. No.1725 of 2022 seeking police protection.
Petitioner has not made out any extraordinary and compelling
circumstances for approaching this Court even when final orders
have not been passed in injunction application I.A. No.767 of 2022
and application in I.A. No.1725 of 2022 seeking police protection
is pending.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing
the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Shadnagar to pass orders
in I.A. No.767 of 2022 as expeditiously as possible within a period
of one (1) month. Thereafter, by giving opportunity of hearing to
respondents - defendants, order shall be passed in I.A. No.1725 of
2022 subject to result of I.A. No.767 of 2022 in O.S. No.303 of
2022. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,
pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
________________________
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J
March 23, 2023
LPD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.7958 OF 2023
23.03.2023
March 23, 2023
LPD
