RAJA IQBAL KARAN Vs. C MALLA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners filed O.S. No. 45 of 2009 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sanga Reddy, against respondents, 2 and 3, for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property, admeasuring Ac.3.18 guntas in different survey numbers of Mamidipally Village, Sanga Reddy Mandal, Medak District. They narrated the manner in which, they are said to have acquired rights, vis-a-vis the property, and alleged that the respondents 2 and 3 are interfering with their possession and enjoyment. Petitioners have also filed I.A. No. 142 of 2009, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. The application was opposed by the respondents 2 and 3. Through its order dated 17-03-2009, the trial Court allowed the I.A.

(2.) The 1st respondent is not a party to the suit, or I.A. He felt aggrieved by the order of temporary injunction, in I.A. No. 142 of 2009. Initially, he approached this Court by filing a revision. On the basis of the orders passed therein, he filed C.M.A. No. 19 of 2009 in the Court of Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SC/ST (POA) Act-cum-V Additional Sessions Judge, Medak, at Sanga Reddy. The C.M.A was allowed, through order dated 31-07-2009, and the order of temporary injunction granted by the trial Court was set aside. Hence, this revision.

(3.) Heard Sri K.V. Bhanu Prasad, Learned Counsel for the petitioners, submits that the lower Appellate Court had based its conclusions on a set of documents, which were not even made part of record, and without giving any opportunity to the petitioners to rebut the same. He contends that, in case the lower Appellate Court felt that the documents filed by the 1st respondent are relevant, it ought to have remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh consideration and disposal.