In this civil revision petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the trial court at Devarakonda to dispose of a 3-year-old interlocutory application for temporary injunction within four weeks.
Directed the trial court to dispose of I.A. No. 696 of 2021 within four weeks of receipt of the order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I I --t. I
[3166 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1479 OF 2024
Petition Under Article 227 of the constitution of lndia against the Order Passed in 1.A.No.696 of 2021 in O.S. No. 279 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Devarakonda.
Betvveen:
Adapala Sandeep, S/o lndra Sena Reddy, Aged 36 Years Occ Agriculture, R/o Cherukupally Village of Dindi lvlandal, Nalgonda District. Presently residing at H. No. 17- 1- 391N152 Saraswathi Nagar, Sadidabad, Hyderabad.
... Petitioner
AND
... Res po n de nts/Defenda nts
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedan the affidavit filed in support of thepetition, the High Court may bepleasedPending
disposal of the main revision petition. lt is prayed that this court may be pleased to :lry 3lfurtherproceedings in t A. No. 696/202.1 in O S. No 279 ot2OZ1, on tfre file of The Principal Junior Civil Judge, at Devarakonda.
Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Praveen Kumar Veerjala
Counsel for the Respondents : Ch.Ramesh Babu
The Court made the following : ORDER
TIII' HON'I]L[, SRI.IUSI'ICT,'I.. VINOD KUMAR
CML REVISION PETITION No.1479 of 2024
OITDEII:
This Revision l'etition is filed to direct the trial Court to dispose of the [nterlocutory Application vide I.A.No.696 ol 2021 filed under Order 39 Rule I and 2 C.P.C. for grant of temporary injunction pending adjudication of the suit vide O.S.No.279 of 2021 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Devarakonda.
2
7 . Petitioner fufther contends that the lnterlocutory Applications of the present nature are filed for grant of tetnporary injunction pending adjudication of the suit and needs to be disposed of in an expeditious manner. However, the said Interlocutory Application filed by the petitioner is pending for more than 3 years.
3
I 1. aving regard to the 1'act that said Interlocutor)' Application is pendirrg consideration since 2021 wherein the respondents have also filed counter-affidavit, this Court is ol'the view that the trial Court should be directed to dispose of the aforesaid Interlocutory Application within a period of lour (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
ts 12. Subject 1o above direction, the Civil Revision Petition disposed o I'. No costs.
closed.
o,3,$X*183't+RtR
I
//TRUECOPY//
To, 1 The PrincipalJuniorCivilJudge'at Devarakond''' "-' 2 ;;" i;iJ .r, !''1""i f U:iY*::rfl$il3io""' 3 One CCto Sri Ch'Ramesl 4. TwoCD CoPies Svs/I)1.w
cTlo NOFFICER
HIGH COURT DATED:0210812024
ORDER
I
I
o
Li
l-
26 afi ru4
I'.r-
\n
' \ // /
r& .'i-,",,.,..1. . ,i. r -
CRP.No.1479 of 2024
DISPOSING OF THE CRP
crda
X^^
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the trial court should be directed to dispose of the interlocutory application for temporary injunction pending for over three years.
Whether the delay in disposal of the interlocutory application dated 15-07-2021 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC defeats the purpose of the filing.
Whether the High Court has the power under Order 39 Rule 3-A CPC to fix a specific time limit for disposal of the interlocutory application.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Adapala Sandeep
Chevula Janga Reddy
Chevula Prabha Reddy
Chevula Raghavender Reddy
Chevula Jagadeeshwar Reddy
Chevula Parvath Reddy
T. Vinod Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
