Disposed

Bandi Kumaraswamy and 2 others v. Mateti Rajamouli and another

Telangana HC20 Apr 2023CRP/946/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 and Section 151 CPC. It directed the Principal Junior Civil Judge to expeditiously decide an interim injunction application in the suit filed by the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Principal Junior Civil Judge to dispose of 1.A. No. 210 of 2021 expeditiously within eight weeks with a reference period.

Bandi Kumaraswamy and 2 others Vs Mateti… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁷ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY^{OF APRIL} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.ABHISHEK REDDY

¶6

ClvlL REVISION PETITION NO: 946 OF 2023

¶7

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia against the order daled20-07-2021^passed in 1.A.2'10 of 2021 in OS. No.998of 2021 on thefile^of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal

¶8

Between:

¶9

'l . Bandi Kumaraswamy, s/o Kanakaiah, aged. 75 years Occu. Hamali, R/o H.No l6-3-1030/1/3, Vidyanagar Colony, Kashikunta, Warangal Urban

¶10

Bandi Rajesh, s/o Kumaraswamy, aged. 31 years, Occu. Gumastha, R/o H.No. l6-3-1030/1/3, Vidyanagar Colony, Kashikunta, Warangal Urban

¶11

Bandi Venkatesh, s/o Kumaraswamy, aged. 30 years, Occu. clerk, R./o H.No.16-3-.1030/'l13, Vidyanagar Colony, Kashikunta, Warangal Urban)

¶12

...PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS

¶13

AND

¶14

Mateti Rajamouli, s/o Sailu, aged. 55 years, occu.Private employee R/o H.No.16-2-1, Kareemabad, Warangal Urban-50600'l

¶15

...RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF

¶16

Mateti Padma, w/o late Nageshwar Rao, aged. 50 years, Occu. Housewife, R/o H.No.16-2-l, Kareemabad, Warangal Urban/506001.

¶17

...RESPONDENT/D.4

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶19

Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in OS.99B ot 2021 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Warangal pending disposal of main CRP

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI Y. HEMA CHANDER

¶21

Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRI MANDAPATI MURALI KRISHNA

¶22

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶23

¶24

( (

¶25

THI: H()i'Bl l, sl{l lUs l-lCE A. AUFIISFIEI(^REDDY

¶26

CI'IT RtrVlSI()\ I'ITTITION No.946 of 2023

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

.\11r:riovcrl [rv tlrt' or.1,'r tlated 20.07.202'1,^{passetl by the}

¶29

learnccl Pritrr ipal J unror^('ir il f^{trilgc,\Vararrga[,in I.A.No.210 of} 2021 irr O.S.\o^9c)8 oi 1021,^tlrr' Pc^{tit iont-rs/ clefenclantshave filed} the prt'serrt^(-ivrI [lcvisior-r^l)ctiIiorl.

¶30

fht' lt'arrrocl coLtrtst'l^l()r. thc^{pctitioners/dcfendantshas} statcrl that thc lcsP()rr(l('nt/plairrtiff^{has filec'l OS NoSSS o( 2027} agair-rst tlre pt'ttliout'rs/r-1e^{[t.nt1.rrrtssceking} Pel^{tnanentinjunction'} That along rtitlr tl.rc saitl^{suit, the respondent/pla intiff has filed'} I.A.No.2l0 o[^{2r)2.1 scckirrgatl- jnterim injunctionand the Court} belort,t,lrlt'ortl(-r LlrlLler^{rt'r'isiot.tdated20.07.2021has granted el-} pnrla acl-intcrirr iuiunctiorr^{itr lavour of} .the^{respondent/plaintiff} ancl adjourncd^{lht' tna tter to 12 08.2021. The learneclcounselhas} furtl'rer sta tc'rl^tha t^{tl-rc Cotr rt [,c'low is extending the said ad-} ir-rterim orclcr ol ir-tiuttcLton^{frour til'ue to time,withoutassigning} any rcasor-$ ancl^{n itl-tout passillc any final orders in the l.A.} 3. A lrerusal of the tlockct Pr.ocr.eclings shou,s that the matter is bcirrl; adjorrrnL,d s.incc l-1.0S 1021. Moreover, .the clefendants

¶31

¶32

havt .rlrcarJr filr'd their cotrrltcl^{aifidavitsin tht' I.,. I lcrrct', this}

¶33

Coult clectns it applopriatc^{to clirect the Courtlrelovvto clisposc} oi thr'[.A. at tl-re catlit'st

¶34

Having regarcl to the abovc,^u'ithout tloirlg^{intothc rnerits} or clenrerits ol the casc, the Civil Rcvisiorr^{Petition is disposed of} with a clirection to the learneci Principal Junior Civil Jr-rclgc, {ar.rrrgal, to^(lispose ol 1.A.No.210 of 2027 in O.S.No.998 oi 2021, on its own r-ncrits, ;rnrl in accordance with law, as expeclitiouslv

¶35

AS Irossitrle, [rrcieratrh',^{w,itl-rin a peliocl of eight weeks fror-n} 'today

¶36

I{iscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stancl

¶37

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

//TRUE COPY//

¶39

Sd/.P.CH.NAGABHUSHAM^BA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR qD

¶40

SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To,

¶42

The Junior Civil Judge,^{Warangal District}

¶43

One CC to Sri^{Y Hema Chander, Advocate} IOPUC]

¶44

One CC to Sri^{Mandapati MuraliKrishna,Advocate [OPUC]}

¶45

Two CD CoPies

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010412023

ORDER

CRP.No.946 of 2023

. ':F
.: .,,.,<br>)
2 4 APB zUn ,' ,j
i|'

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE C.R.P

¶53

L,,-
l\ A
*\ .^\ >'3
)

Bandi Kumaraswamy and 2 others v. Mateti Rajamouli and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bandi Kumaraswamy and 2 others v. Mateti Rajamouli and another

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

M. Venkateshwarlu Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

R.Sanjeeva Rao Vs TheChairman and Managing Director

Bashaboina Kaushik Kumar Vs Sri P.Kiran Kumar

Syed Doulat Hussain, Hyd. Vs Ceo, Apswb, Hyd. and 3 Ors.

Bharat Dynamics Ltd., Vs The Labour Coaurt_I

Telangana Electricity Employees Association, Vs The A.P. Genco