VALLAMBHATLA PURNACHANDER Vs. THONTA BALARAMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Order XLIII Rule 1 of CPC, is filed by the appellant/plaintiff, challenging the order, dated 23.12.2019, passed in I.A.No.169 of 2019 in O.S.No.31 of 2019, by the V Additional District Judge, Bhongir, whereby, the order, dated 25.02.2019, passed by the Court below granting ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents/defendants, their henchmen and agents, from interfering with the possession of the appellant/plaintiff over the suit schedule property till 02.04.2019 and which was extended from time to time, was modified to that of granting status quo as regards possession of the appellant/plaintiff over the suit schedule property.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant/plaintiff would contend that the Court below ought not have modified the relief of interim injunction into status quo. In the given circumstances, the Court below ought to have granted temporary injunction, pending disposal of the subject suit. The appellant/plaintiff has fulfilled all the requirements of Order XXXIX Rule 1 of CPC and ultimately prayed to set aside the order under challenge and grant temporary injunction as prayed for. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel had relied on a decision of this Court in Mangilal Chowdary and another Vs. P.Kasinath Yadav,2019 6 ALD 588 (TS).