IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY THIS THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5017 of 2013 Between: M.A.Khayyum . PETITIONER And K.Viswanatham . RESPONDENT The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5017 of 2013
ORDER:
This revision is against orders dated 15.05.2013 in CMA No.4 of 2013 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Wanaparthy, Mahaboobnagar District, whereunder, orders dated 21.01.2013 in I.A.No.508/2010 in O.S.No.232/2010 are confirmed.
Brief facts leading to filing this revision are as follows:
Respondent herein filed O.S.No.232/2010 for permanent injunction in respect of Ac.1.38 gts of land in Sy.No.1131/A1/1 situated at Chandapur Road, Wanaparthy village, Mahboobnagar District and Ac.0.13.5 gts of land in Sy.No.1131/A3 situated at Chandapur Road, Wanaparthy village, Mahboobnagar District. In the suit, plaintiff filed I.A.No.508/2010 claiming interim injunction and the same is resisted by the revision petitioner herein. The trial Court on consideration of 25 documents produced on behalf of plaintiff and 36 documents produced on behalf of defendant granted temporary injunction restraining respondent from interfering with possession and enjoyment till disposal of the suit and the said order is challenged in appeal before the District Court and the Additional District Judge, Wanaparthy on reappraisal of the material, confirmed the orders of the trial Court.
Heard both sides.
Now the main contention of the revision petitioner is that injunction cannot be granted against a co-owner because as per the plaint averments both plaintiff and defendant jointly purchased an extent of Ac.4.23 gts, therefore, the injunction granted by the Courts below is not correct. Advocate for respondent/plaintiff submitted that defendant took inconsistent pleas, at one stage he contended it is a benami transaction and at another stage he contended that he is co- owner and these aspects have to be decided only during trial on appreciation of evidence.
Now the point that arise for consideration in this revision is whether there is any material irregularity, illegality or otherwise, warranting interference with the order of the Court below.
As seen from the material papers and as per the plaint averments an extent of Ac.4.23 gts was purchased jointly, whereas the schedule property is not the entire land, it is only half of the total extent. According to Advocate for petitioner, there was no partition between the parties after joint purchase. These aspects have to be decided only on appreciation of evidence adduced on behalf of both parties.
Admittedly, suit is of the year 2010 and it is ripe for trial. In a revision, scope is very limited and this Court has to examine whether the order of the Court below is without jurisdiction or there is any material irregularity in passing the impugned order. Both the Courts below concurrently held that prima facie case is in favour of the plaintiff, and by considering the balance of convenience, granted temporary injunction. Now at this stage, without any apparent material irregularity, such concurrent findings cannot be interfered. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, I feel that this civil revision petition can be disposed of by directing the trial Court to take up trial of main suit and dispose of it within stipulated time.
For these reasons, the trial Court is directed to expedite trial of O.S.No.232/2010 and dispose it of as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, and the trial Court shall decide the suit without being influenced by any of the findings or observations passed by the lower appellate Court or this Court.
This Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.
S.RAVI KUMAR,J Date: 22.12.2014 Dsr