AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed by the petitioner/defendant under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the orders, dated 15.07.2025 and 06.01.2026, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam (for short, 'the trial Court) in I.A.Nos.83 and 149 of 2025 respectively, whereby the trial Court granted an ad interim injunction and police protection in respect of the petition schedule property.
Heard Mr. Mummaneni Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. M. V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel for the respondent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial Court, without assigning any reasons, granted an ad interim injunction on 15.07.2025, though the respondent was not in possession of the petition scheduled property as on the date of institution of the suit. The trial Court ought to have record reasons while granting an ex parte ad interim injunction and that the impugned order dated 15.07.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is contrary to the settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shiv Kumar Chadha v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi1.
He further submitted that the respondent/plaintiff subsequently filed I.A.No.149 of 2025 seeking police protection for implementation of the ad interim injunction order dated 15.07.2025. The trial Court, without issuing notice and affording an opportunity to the petitioner, straightaway allowed the said application and directed the Station House Officer, Police Station Charla, to provide police aid to the respondent/plaintiff and the same is contrary to law.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner had an effective and efficacious remedy of filing an application seeking vacation of the ad interim injunction before the trial Court. Without availing such remedy, the petitioner straightaway approached this Court and filed the present Civil Revision Petitions and the same are not maintainable under law.
He further submitted that the learned trial Court rightly granted police protection. In spite of subsistence of the ad interim injunction granted by the learned trial Court, the petitioner has been trying to interfere with the respondent's possession over the suit schedule property. The learned trial Court rightly granted police protection and there is no illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned orders passed by the learned trial Court to exercise the powers conferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.88 of 2025 for grant of perpetual injunction restraining the petitioner/defendant from interfering with the suit schedule property. Along with the said suit, the respondent filed I.A.No.83 of 2025 under Rule 42(C) of the T.S. Agency Rules, 1924 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking an ad interim injunction. The learned trial Court, by order dated 15.07.2025, granted an ad interim injunction till disposal of the suit.
The record further reveals that thereafter, in the month of October, 2025, the respondent filed I.A.No.149 of 2025 seeking police aid for implementation of the ad interim injunction order. The learned trial Court, by order dated 06.01.2026, directed the Station House Officer, Police Station Charla, to provide necessary police protection to the respondent in respect of the petition scheduled property.
This Court, while ordering notice before admission on 17.04.2026 in C.R.P.No.1186 of 2026, directed both the parties to maintain status quo in all respects with regard to the possession of the subject property. The said interim order is continuing.
The record further reveals that even according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has not filed either a counter in I.A.Nos.83 and 149 of 2025 or a written statement in O.S.No.88 of 2025. A perusal of the impugned order dated 15.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.83 of 2025 and the impugned order dated 06.01.2026 passed in I.A.No.149 of 2025 reveal that the learned trial Court, without assigning any reasons, granted ad interim injunction and police aid solely basing on the averments made in the sworn affidavit filed by the respondent, which is in violation of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shiv Kumar (supra) and also contrary to the principle of this Court in Senthan Properties, Hyderabad v. S.V.S. Infra Services Private Limited Hyderabad2.
For the foregoing reasons as well as the precedent decisions, the impugned orders passed by the learned trial Court, dated 15.07.2025 passed in I.A.No.83 of 2025 and dated 06.01.2026 passed in I.A.No.149 of 2025, are liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside.
The petitioner/defendant is granted liberty to file counters in I.A.Nos.83 and 149 of 2025 within a period of three (3) weeks from today. The learned trial is directed to consider the applications i.e., I.A.No.83 and 149 of 2025 filed by the respondent, and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (6) weeks from thereafter. In the meantime, both parties are directed maintain status quo with regard to possession of the petition schedule property. It is made clear that the parties to the lis shall cooperate with the trial for disposal of I.A.Nos.83 and 149 of 2025 without seeking undue adjournments.
With the above directions, both the Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.