or.39, rule 1 - as per the proceedings of Revenue Divisional officer, dated 20.09.2019, Pattadar pass book issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled and his family member certificate was also cancelled and as such, he is not entitled for equitable relief of injunction. The petitioner as well as the respondents are claiming title over the petition schedule property. When there is a serious dispute with regard to the title between the parties, simple suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable. In these circumstances, it is not just and proper to grant temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the CMA was dismissed, vide order, dated 25.02.2020.

or.39, rule 1 - as per the proceedings of Revenue Divisional officer, dated 20.09.2019, Pattadar pass book issued in favour of the petitioner was cancelled and his family member certificate was also cancelled and as such, he is not entitled for equitable relief of injunction. The petitioner as well as the respondents are claiming title over the petition schedule property. When there is a serious dispute with regard to the title between the parties, simple suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable. In these circumstances, it is not just and proper to grant temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the CMA was dismissed, vide order, dated 25.02.2020. 

AP HIGH COURT

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.KRISHNA MOHAN

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.982 of 2020

Gokapai Gandhi,
Versus

Bandi Karunakar,

ORDER:

 This Civil Revision Petition is filed challenging the

order in CMA No.8 of 2019 on the file of the Court of the IX Additional

District Judge, Machilipatnam, dated 25.02.2020 confirming the

order in I.A.No.738 of 2018 in O.S.103 of 2018, dated 16.07.2019 on

the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in Original Suit No.103 of

2018 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda. The said suit

is filed seeking permanent injunction against the defendants therein

with respect to item Nos.1 and 2 of the Plaint schedule property.

Pending suit, the petitioner also filed I.A.738 of 2018 before the Senior

Civil Judge, Avanigadda under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC and

Section 151 of CPC seeking to grant temporary injunction restraining

the respondents, their followers and successors from interfering with

the petition schedule property, contending that the petitioner’s father

said to have executed an unregistered Will, dated 19.11.2016

bequeathing the petition schedule property and he died later on

19.09.2017 and ever since, the petitioner has been in possession and

enjoyment of the petition schedule property. While so, the

respondents/defendants are trying to trespass into the schedule

property under the guise of a registered Will said to have been

executed by their father, dated 23.09.2016.

4. After hearing both the parties in I.A No.738 of 2018 and relying

upon the documents submitted before the trial court, the trial court 

2

came to a conclusion that the factum of possession would be decided

in the main suit and thus the petitioner has failed to establish his

prima-facie case and balance of convenience in his favour and as

such, the petitioner is not entitled for temporary injunction as prayed

for and there would be no irreparable loss to the petitioner, even if

temporary injunction is refused. Accordingly, the I.A.No.738 of 2018

was dismissed on 16.07.2019.

5. Aggrieved by the order in I.A.No.738 of 2018 in O.S.103 of 2018

on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda, dated 16.07.2019,

the petitioner filed CMA No.8 of 2019 on the file of the IX Additional

District Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.

6. After hearing both sides, the IX Additional District Judge,

Machilipatnam observed that as per the proceedings of Revenue

Divisional officer, dated 20.09.2019, Pattadar pass book issued in

favour of the petitioner was cancelled and his family member

certificate was also cancelled and as such, he is not entitled for

equitable relief of injunction. The petitioner as well as the respondents

are claiming title over the petition schedule property. When there is a

serious dispute with regard to the title between the parties, simple

suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable. In these

circumstances, it is not just and proper to grant temporary injunction

in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, the CMA was dismissed, vide

order, dated 25.02.2020.

7. Aggrieved by the order of the IX Additional District Judge,

Machilipatnam, Krishna District in CMA No.8 of 2019, dated

25.02.2020, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the

petitioner. 

3

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that before the

Courts below, there was an exparte injunction, upon filing the vacate

stay applications, on merits, the I.A was dismissed, since the suit

itself is for permanent injunction, the courts below ought not have

gone into the aspect of title to the property and denied grant of

injunction to the petitioner and sought for protection of the

possession.

9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, since both the

Courts below have come to a conclusion on prima facie that the

petitioner could not establish his possession in the above said I.A.,

the relief could not be granted, unless the matter is further gone into

the merits with regard to the title and possession in the main suit. In

such circumstances, no temporary injunction can be granted at this

juncture and as such, this Court is not interfering with the orders of

the Courts below.

10. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However,

the trial Court is directed to proceed with the suit by giving due

opportunity to all the parties concerned as expeditiously as possible

and dispose of the same in accordance with law. There shall be no

order as to costs of the Civil Revision Petition.

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

the Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed.

_______________________________

JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN

13.08.2020

mp