Between THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3147 OF 2012 Dated:24-10-2014
Shaik Jaan Ahmed
AND
The Tahsildar, Asif Nagar Mandal, Hyderabad and another
... PETITIONER
.. RESPONDENTS
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3147 OF 2012 ORDER:
The petitioner filed O.S No.3692 of 2008 in the Court of IV Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the respondents for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. He has also filed I.A No. 232 of 2009 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC for the relief of temporary injunction. After contest by the parties, the trial Court dismissed the I.A through order dated 04-06-2010. Aggrieved by that, the petitioner filed C.M.A No. 106 of 2010 in the Court of X Additional Chief Judge (Fast Track Court), City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The C.M.A was dismissed on 07-03-2012. Hence, this revision.
Heard Sri Damodar Mundra, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Arbitration for the respondents.
The injunction relief claimed by the petitioner is in respect of an item of immovable property. In the course of hearing of the I.A filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC, the trial Court found that there is a serious contest between the parties as to the very possession of the property and on noticing that the petitioner failed to prove his possession over the property, dismissed the I.A. The lower appellate Court has also undertaken extensive discussion with reference to the relevant facts borne out by record and dismissed the appeal. The scope of interference with the concurrent findings of fact, that too arising out of an interlocutory application is very limited in a C.R.P under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. At any rate, the learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to satisfy this Court that the findings recorded by the lower appellate Court are perverse.
The C.R.P is accordingly dismissed. However, the trial Court shall taken up the suit itself for hearing and none of the observations made in the order passed in the I.A or the C.M.A shall be treated as final in the course of adjudication of the suit.
The miscellaneous petitions filed in this revision shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 24-10-2014 ks