AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D.V.S.S. Somayajulu, J
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
It is pointed out that the order dated 20.04.2023 in I.A.No. 709 of 2022 in O.S.No. 257 of 2022, directed the listing of the matter on 23.05.2023. Learned counsel points out that a paper publication was properly made directing the respondents to appear on 23.05.2023. It is pointed that 23.05.2023 falls in Summer Vacations for lower courts. Apart from this, the petitioner also filed some photographs and other material to show that the respondents are violating the order of status quo that was granted earlier.
In the opinion of this Court, these are matters, which should be decided by the trial court, not by this court. However, on a reading of the material, it is clear that the initial order of status quo was granted on 23.12.2022. Thereafter for service of notice, the matter is being adjourned. It appears that the 3rd respondent has received the notice and publication was ordered for respondents 1 and 4. The date fixed is as 23.05.2023 for next hearing.
This is the area, which is worrying this court. The petitioner approached the court seeking redressal in the form of protective order. It is stated in the affidavit that the respondents are flouting the order granted earlier. The matter is scheduled to be listed on 23.05.2023. Without going into merits of the matter, the petitioner is given liberty to file an affidavit in detail with all facts before the concerned trial court and the said court is directed to immediately take up the matter on priority and decide the same. If there is any violation of the earlier order as alleged, it is left open to the trial court to come to his own conclusions. If an application is made, the court should immediately take it up and decide the matter on merits.
With the observation C.R.P is disposed of. No costs.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.