BUYYANA SRIRAMULU Vs. GOLLA VENKATARATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision Petition arises out of order dated 16 -3 -2012 in E.A.No.767/2012 in E.P.No.54/2012 in O.S.No.4/2009 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kothagudem.

(2.) THE petitioner suffered a decree for perpetual injunction in the above mentioned suit filed by the respondent. The respondent filed E.P.No.54/2012 for execution of the decree. In the said E.P. he has filed E.A.No.767/2012 seeking the Police aid. The lower Court, by its order dated 16 -3 -2012, straightaway gave a direction to the Police to grant necessary aid for implementation of the decree upto 26 -3 -2012.

(3.) EVEN though, the period for which the direction was given has expired, I feel it necessary to observe that the lower Court has committed a serious error in granting exparte order of the Police aid. When an application for the Police aid is filed, the Court is bound to issue notice to the other party before considering grant of such relief in favour of the applicant, for the relief of the Police aid may some times lead to far reaching consequences. It is therefore always proper and desirable that whenever applications for the Police aid are filed, the Courts must, in the first place, invariably issue a notice to the opposite party and pass appropriate order only after hearing such party. As this procedure has not been followed by the lower Court, the impugned order cannot be sustained. At any rate, since the validity of the order under revision had expired and there does not appear to be a further order extending the same, it need not be formally set -aside. The lower Court is directed to hear both the parties and dispose of the E.A. in accordance with law.