M A E KUMAR VARMA Vs. RAMOJI RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 22-01-2008 in i. A. No. 794 of 2007 in O. S. No. 212 of 2007, on the file of the VI! Additional District Judge (Fasttrack Court), Visakhapatnam, wherein the application filed by the revision petitioner/ first defendant under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, seeking rejection of the plaint, was dismissed.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/first defendant and the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2/ plaintiffs. Perused the records.

(3.) RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 herein filed the suit O. S. No. 212 of 2007, on the file of vii Additional District Judge (Fast Track court), Visakhapatnam, for a direction to the petitioner/first defendant to renew the lease for a further period of 33 years on a rent of rs. 10,000/- per month initially or such other sum the Court may deem reasonable and also direct the first defendant to join the plaintiffs in applying for exemption granted in G. O. Ms. No. 427 dated 1-3-1978 for a period co-terminus with the extended lease and for a direction that if the first defendant fails to join the plaintiffs in applying for exemption and register the lease, the Court itself may execute and register the lease deed at the expense of the first defendant. The suit is also filed for injunction restraining the first defendant,his agents and representatives from interfering with the plaintiffs' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property and also injunction restraining the first defendant from creating third party interest in the suit schedule property. It is pertinent to note that the relief of specific performance and the releif of injunction are separately valued and separate court fee is paid thereon.