LACHALLA KISTAIAH Vs. REKHA RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is filed by the petitioner/Respondent under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 02.04.2014 in C.M.A.No.5 of 2013 on the file of VI Additional District Judge at Siddipet, Medak District under which the order and decree dated 30.01.2013 in I.A. No.942 of 2012 in O.S. No.279 of 2012 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Siddipet was set aside.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that the petitioner herein filed the suit for perpetual injunction in respect of the petition schedule property and he also filed a petition for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C in I.A. No.942 of 2012 and the same was allowed. Aggrieved by the said order the respondents herein preferred the appeal before the learned District Judge and the same was allowed by setting aside the I.A. No.942 of 2012.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner is that he is the owner and possessor of the petition schedule property i.e., house site plot to an extent of 132.30 Sq. yards in Sy.No.1497 situated near New Tahsildar Office, Prashanthinagar, Siddipet and purchased the same through registered sale deed bearing document No.3716/2012, dated 24.07.2012 by paying entire sale consideration from one Vasala Padma Reddy and was inducted into possession on the same day and since then he was in peaceful possession of the petition schedule property and he started the construction in petition schedule property by obtaining necessary permissions and paying taxes to Municipal authorities and by obtaining electricity connection. The Respondents who are no way concerned with the suit schedule property on 11.12.2002 with a dishonest intention tried to interfere in the petition schedule property by creating bogus and fabricated documents and prayed to grant temporary injunction. The respondents filed counter contending that the present suit is counter blast to O.S. No.273 of 2012 which is filed by Respondent No.2 herein for declaration of title and for perpetual injunction challenging the claim of purchase of suit/petition schedule property and this suit is filed after service of injunction warrant on petitioner/plaintiff herein and now the present suit is for mere ancillary relief without seeking for efficacious and substantial relief, and also contended that the respondents are no way concerned with the suit schedule property is wrong and the respondents created bogus and false documents and tried to interrupt the construction is false, in fact, the petitioner has been putting his efforts to usurp the petition schedule property and further submitted that the petitioner in utter violation of interim injunction dated 17.12.2012 in their absence during the night hours trespassed into schedule property and dug 6 pits with JCB and erected 6 pillars laid with RCC concrete upto ground level and also submitted that there is no case to be tried muchless prima facie case and no balance of convenience and hence prayed to dismiss the petition.