Disposed

S. Tirupathi v. Kyama Venkata Swamy

Telangana HC12 Dec 2025CRP/4497/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revision against an ex parte ad interim injunction in a specific performance suit. The High Court noted the trial Court must dispose of such interlocutory applications within thirty days under Order XXXIX Rule 3A CPC and directed it to decide the pending injunction application within that period, leaving the petitioner liberty to seek early hearing.

What did the court decide?

Trial Court directed to dispose of I.A.No.348 of 2025 in O.S.No.338 of 2025 within thirty days; liberty to petitioner for advance hearing; no costs.

S. Tirupathi Vs Kyama Venkata Swamy — Specific Performance | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶5

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:4497 OF 2o2s

¶6

Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to set aside the order dated 1B/10/2025 passed in I A No. 348 of 2025 in O.S.No. 338 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal- Malkajgiri District at Medchal and dismiss the LA.No.348 of 2025.

¶7

Between:

¶8

S. Tirupathi, S/o Srinivas Reddy, Aged about 40 years, Occ- Business, Rl/o H.No.5-24-578/4, Chandragiri Nagar, Gajularamaram, Medchal- Malkajgiri District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

Kyama Venkata Swamy, S/o Kyama Narayana, Aged 41 years, OccBusiness, R/o H.No.1-41 , Karivena, Boothpur Mandal. Karvena, Mahabubnagar, Telangana, Presently residing at H.No-24-370, Chandragiri Nagar, NTR Nagar, Near Shivalayam Temple, Gajularamaram, Medchaltvlalkajgiri District.

¶12

Ivladuka Kurumurthy, S/o M.Gouraiah, Aged 50 years, Occ- Private Employee. Rl/o H.No.5-24-37'1. Chandragiri Nagar, Near Shivalayam Temple, Gajularamaram, Medchal-Malkajgiri District.

¶13

3, Manne Umesh, S/o Late M.Narayana. Aged 50 years, Occ- Business, Fl/o H.No.24-370, Chandragiri Nagar. Near Shivalayam Temple, Gajularamaram. lvledchal-tVlalkajgiri District.

¶14

M.Sunitha, w/o Late M.Ramesh, Aged 37 years, Occ- Housewife. Rl/o H.No.13, Toopran Village and Mandal. Medak District. (Respondents No.2 to 4 herein not necessary parties)

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the citr^{umstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{High Court maybe pleasedto} Suspend the Order, dated 1B/10/2025^{passedin l.A.No. 3zl of 2025in O.S.No} 338 of 2025 on the file of Additional Senior^{Civil Judg,: 14s665a1-tValkajgiri} District at Medchal.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRl. V POORNASRI

¶19

Counsel forthe Respondents: BANDI SAI VAMSHI FOR Rl

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

i1 t.

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT: HYDERABAD

¶23

HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

¶24

CIVTL REVISI ON PETITION No.4497 OF 202s

DATE:12-12-2025

Between

Mr. S. Tirupathi

Petitioner - Dcfcndant No.,l

¶29

¶30

Mr. Klama Venkata Srvamv & others

¶31

.. Respondents - I'laintit'l'& Dclcndants

¶32

l'his Court made the fbllowing:

¶33

ORAL ORI)ER:

¶34

llcard Mr. Papaiah Peddakula, leamed counsel represenring Ms.

¶35

V. Poornasri, ieamed counsel for the petitioner herein - delcnclunr No.4 antl i,1r. Bancii Sai Vamshi, learned counsel lor respondenl No_ I - plainti ll. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are not necessary pat-tics.

¶36

Respondent No.I herein has filed a suit in O.S. No.3i8 ol' 2025 against the petitioner helein and respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein tbr specific pcrlbrmance of agreement of sale and consequential injunction. Along with the said suit, he has also filed an Irrtcr locurur r Application t'ide 348 ol 2025 seeking temporary injunction. I,'itla ordcr datcd 18.10.2025. the learned Additional Seniol Civil Judg... Medchal - Malkajgiri District at Medchal, granted ex partc a.l intat inl

¶37

¶38

KL,J CRP No^4a97 of2021

¶39

injunction and posted the said I.A.^{to 03.11.2025.{, rallenging the} said order, the pctitioner filed the^{presentrevisionconL' nding that the} trial Court has not recorded the three^{(03) essentialin1 redients rvhile} granting ad interim injunction while dispensing^wit I^{noticeto the} petitioner and other defcndants i.c.,^primo .facie^{cl': c, balance ol} convenience and irreparable loss

¶40

With regard to maintainability o[the^{present r:vision, he has} cited two^judgrnents of this Court in Bangla^Shr kar^{v. Balla} Shankaraiahr and the Madras tligh Court at^{Madurai I ench in Latha} Ilangovan v. Usha Rajaram2.

¶41

Perusal ol the irnpugncd order would revc; that the trial Court passcd an od interim iniunction observing that^{hc trial Court} has perused the material papers, affidavit,^{petition do< r tnents filedin} support thereol'and granted acl inlerim injunction.^{Thr: tl'ial Court has} posted the said I.A. ro 03.1 1.2025

¶42

It is apt to notc that the trial Courl can^{d i} ;^rcnsewith the notice to the respondcnt u'hile granting an ad interint it Ltttction order, in which event learned trial Court has to dispo:;, ol' the said

¶43

r. C.R.P. No.3l95 ol20l4. dccided on I L09.2025

¶44

c.R.P.(MD)No.tl6loil0t9&clvlt,(iut))No.7it9of 20tg.decidedor l-.092019

I/i t,'

KI,,J CRP No 4497 of2025

¶49

interlocutory application within thifty (30) days in terms of Order - XXXX, Rule - 3A of CPC. Though the petitioner filed the present revision under Article - 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dated 18.10.2025 passed by the trial Court, he is restricting the relief to a direction to the leamed trial Court to dispose of the said I.A. in terms of Order - XXXIX, Rule - 3A of CPC.

¶50

In the tight of the aforesaid discussion, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of directing the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Medchal - Malkajgiri District at Medchal, to dispose of I.A. No.348 of 2025 in O.S. No.i38 of 2025 within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt oIcopy of this order. Liberty is granted to the petitioner herein to file an advanceurent petition to advance the said I.A. atong with counter immediateil,. In the circurnstances of the cases, there shall be no order as to cosls.

¶51

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in

¶52

the revision shall stand closed

¶53

SD/- T.SRINIVAS REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶54

//TRUE COPY//

¶55

SEC FICER

¶56

/ J