SYED AHMED MOHIUDDIN MADANI Vs. G KUSUM KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner filed OS No. 2096 of 2011 in the Court of XXII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the respondent for the relief of permanent injunction. He has also filed IA No. 516 of 2011 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction. The IA was allowed and an order of temporary injunction was passed by the trial Court. The respondent, on the other hand, filed IA No. 296 of 2012 in IA No. 516 of 2011 in OS No. 2096 of 2011 with a prayer to grant temporary injunction against the petitioner, restraining him from making any construction over the suit property, or from changing the physical features thereof. The trial Court dismissed IA No. 296 of 2012, through order dated 15-10-2012. Respondent filed CMA No. 156 of 2012 in the Court of II Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, feeling aggrieved by the dismissal of IA 296 of 2012. She has also filed IA No. 3045 of 2012 for the same relief that was prayed for in IA No. 296 of 2012 in the trial Court. CMA has since been made over to the Court of III Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Through order dated 30-4-2013, the lower appellate Court directed the parties to maintain status-quo and listed the matter on 4-6-2013. Petitioner challenges the order dated 30-4-2013 passed in IA No. 3045 of 2012 in CMA No. 156 of 2012.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) An order of ad-interim temporary injunction was passed in IA No. 516 of 2011 in favour of the petitioner herein in September, 2011. It is stated that the respondent filed counter in the IA and prayed for dismissal thereof. IA No. 516 of 2011 has been disposed of by this time. Alleging that the trial Court was not taking up the IA 516 of 2011, the respondent has filed IA No. 296 of 2012 in IA No. 516 of 2011 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 CPC.