Allowed

M/s. Polytech Engineers and Consultants v. M/s. Blue Sea Industries Private Limited

Telangana HC2 Sept 2021CRP/1150/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows a civil revision petition challenging a lower court order that dismissed the main suit and vacated a temporary injunction without conducting a trial. The High Court remanded the matter to the lower court to conduct the trial and decide the applications properly.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 21.10.2020 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the lower court to conduct the trial and decide the suit within three months.

M/s. Polytech Engineers and Consultants Vs M/s. Blue… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF^TVIARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI}

¶6

CIVIL REVI S ION PETITION^{NO:1150 OF2020}

¶7

Petition Under Aiticle^{227 of constitutionof lndiaagainst the orderdated} 21-10-2020inl.A.No.2970f^{2O2Oino.S.No.3150f20200nthefileof thecourtof the} Special Assistant Agent^{and Sub Divisional fi/agistrate (Mobilecourt)at Bhadrachalam.}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Smt. Pulvala chittemma,^{w/o.Late Sitharamulu,Aged 65 years, occ- Agriculture,} Rlo. Xortit onOa Villaqe,^{Lakshmidevipalli Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudemurslrrct.}

¶10

...PETlTlONERy^{Petitioner / Plaintiff}

¶11

AND

¶12

Sri. Bolla Chandra^{Reddy, S/o Sathireddy' Aged pQyears, Occ-Agriculture'} Hi;. u",;;;il;rdraprra.i^{viirlge, iarsnmioeiipalirviandar,Bhadradri Kothasudem} District.

¶13

...RESPONDENT/^{Respondent / Defendant}

¶14

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶15

Petition under Section^{151 cPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavitfiledinSupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedtosuspendthe orderdated2l,1o.2o2opassedrnl.A.No.297ol2O2oino.S.No.315of2020onthe file of The special^{Assistant Agentand sub-Divisionallvlagistrate(Mobilecourt)at} Bhadrachalam

¶16

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRISWAROOPOORILLA}

¶17

Counsel for the^{Respondent: SRI P. RAMASHARANA SHARwIA}

¶18

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶19

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE ABHINANDKUMAR SHAVILI} CIVTL REVISION^{PE'I ITIONNo.l 150 of 2020}

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This Civil^{Revision Petitionby the petitioner/plaintiff'under} Article 227^{of the constitutionof India, is directed against the order,} dated 21.10.2020,^{of the learned Special Assistant Agent and Sub-} Divisional Magistrate^{(Mobile Court) at Bhadrachalam, passed in} LA.No.297 of 2020^{in O'S.No'315of 2020'}

¶22

It has been contended^{by the petitioner that she hasfi1ed the} aforesaicl suit before^{the Special Assistant Agentand Sub-Divisional} Magistate (Mobile^{Cour-t) at Bhadrachalam,seeking perpetual} injunction against^{the respondent/det'endantAlongrvith the suit, she} has filed an application^{being LA.No.297 ol 2020 seeking temporary} injunction, and the Courl^{belowwas pleased to granttemporary} injunction vide orders^{dated25.092020. Theleatier, the respondent} filed vacate petition under^{Rule 42 of Agency Rules,I 924'The Court} below, vide order dated^{21.10.2020, while vacatingthe temporary} injunction order which was^granted in^{favourof the petitioner,has} dismissed the main suit itself^{without conducting any trial and without} giving any opportunity to the petitioner. Challenging the same,^the present revision is filed.

¶23

Counsel for the petitioner has contended^{that the Courtbelow} has exceeded its^{jurisdiction.} Counsel further contended that the Coutl

¶24

CRP.No.l I50 0f2020 AKS,]

¶25

¶26

below ought^{to have decided the vacate stay petitionalone filed by the} respondent, but^{while vacating the temporaryinjunction order' it has} straight away^{dismissedthe suit also withoutconductingany trialand} without permitting the^{petitioner to leadevidence'therefore' the} impugned order^{is liable to be set aside and the tnatter be relnanded} back to the^{Court belowfor freshadjudication of LA'No '297 of 2020} filed by the^{petitioner, seekingtemporaryinjunction' and also to} decide the^{suit filed by the petitioner'}

¶27

Counsel^{appearingfor the respondent has contended that} technically^{the Court belowwas incorrect in dismissing the suit itself} without coprducting^{any trial, therefore, Iet the impugned order be set} aside and^{the matter be remandedback to the Court below with a} direction to^{give opportunity to both parties and thereafter to decide} the LA^{as well as the suit preferred by the petitioner'}

¶28

This Court,^{havingconsideredthe rival submissionsol learned} counsel fbr^{respectile parties, is of the considered view that the Court} below erred^{in dismissing the suit itself without conducting any trial'}

¶29

Hence, the^{CivitRevisionPetition is allowed settingaside the} order dated^{21.10.2020 in I'A'No'297 of 2020 in O'S'No'3l5 of 2020} passed by^{the leamed Special AssistantAgent and Sub-Divisional} Magistrate^{(Mobile Coufi) at Bhadrachalamand' in the peculiar} circumstances^{of the case, the matter is remandedbackto the Court} below^{with a directionto decide l'A'No'297of 2020 preferredby the}

¶30

CRI'.N0.I^{150 ol 202tl} AKS..I

¶31

petitioner and also^{to decidethe suit in accordancewith law' lt is} needless to state^{that while adjudicating the case, the Courtbelow} shall give oppoftunity^{to the petitioneras well as the respondentand} pass orders in accordance^{with law and also the Courtbelow shall} decide the I.A^{preferred by the petitioner,withina reasonable period} of time, preferably^{withinthree months from the date of receiptof a} copy of this order.^{No orderas to costs.}

¶32

Pending miscellaneous^{petitions,if any, shatl stand closed'}

SD/.K.SAILESHI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Special Assistant Agent^{andSub Divisional lr,4agistrate(tvobile Court) at} Bhadrachalam.

¶39

One CC to Sri. Swaroop Oorilla,^Advocate IOPUC]

¶40

One CC to Sri. P. Rama Sharana^{Sharma, Advocate} [OPUC]

¶41

Two CD Copies gbr

¶42

\ ]$--

¶43

HIGH^COURT

¶44

DATED:1^810312021

¶45

-li s tAra
1
k
e
:)
i) 01 APB 2021 .bo
*
+
E

ORDER

GRP.No.1150 of 2020

ALLOWING THE CRP

M/s. Polytech Engineers and Consultants v. M/s. Blue Sea Industries Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Polytech Engineers and Consultants v. M/s. Blue Sea Industries Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ch.Ravi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Shaik Farooq and Anr.

M/S. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Hyd. Vs Palle Lingamma, and 3 Others

Mr. Alay Razvi Vs M/s. Aditya Construction Company India (P) Ltd.

M/s. Leafin India Limited (In Liqn.) Vs No Respondent

M/s. Nirup Synchrome Limited (In Liqn.) Vs No Respondent