JAI PRAKASH REDDY Vs. PRABHAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The review petitioners are defendant Nos.9 and 10 in O.S.No.1168/2004, appellants in R.A.No.98/2020 and impleading applicant as respondent No.15 in MFA No.1336/2025 have filed this review petition under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Sec. 114 of CPC praying to review the order passed in MFA No.1336/2025 dtd. 11/8/2025 passed by this Court.

(2.) One Peddanna is the original propositus and he had five children namely, Lakshmi Bai, Gurramma, Thippamma, Narayanappa and Balappa Reddy and among them, it is stated that Lakshmi Bai died unmarried. Thippamma had filed the suit for partition in O.S.No.1168/2004, which is dismissed. Thereafter, R.A.No.98/2020 came to be filed, which is pending before the First Appellate Court. In R.A.No.98/2020, the appellant - Balappa Reddy has filed an application for temporary injunction by invoking the provision under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, but the same is dismissed by the order dtd. 19/12/2024. Being aggrieved by dismissal of the said application, his legal heirs have filed MFA No.1336/2025 praying for an interim order of injunction. This Court on 11/8/2025 has allowed the said MFA No.1336/2025 and granted an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant Nos.9 and 10 in O.S.No.1168/2004 and appellants R.A.No.98/2020 from interfering with the possession of suit schedule properties and damaging any structure including the tomb of Smt. Gurramma till the final disposal of R.A.No.98/2020. Being aggrieved by allowing MFA No.1336/2024 and granting an order of temporary injunction, the present review petition is filed on the ground that certain observations made by this Court in the said MFA are error apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, prays to review the order and modify the order passed in MFA No.1336/2024.

(3.) The daughter of Peddanna namely, Thippamma has filed the suit for partition and separate possession against the husband of defendant i.e., late Narayanappa. It is stated that Pedanna during his lifetime has acquired ancestral properties, which is land bearing Sy.No.12 to the extent of 8 acre 16 guntas for sale consideration through registered sale deed dtd. 2/10/1952. After acquiring the same he was cultivating the suit schedule properties and after his death, the husband of defendant No.1 namely, Narayanappa and defendant No.2 namely, Balappa Reddy are cultivating the said land jointly. Therefore, filed the suit for partition and separate possession in the suit schedule properties and the said suit O.S.No.1168/2004 is dismissed.