A Pushpa v. M Sunitha,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4132 of 2015 Between:

A.Pushpa.

....Petitioner and M.Sunitha and others.

....Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 27.11.2015 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO :

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be : No Marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to : No see the fair copy of the Judgment?

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4132 of 2015 ORDER:

The petitioner herein is the plaintiff in O.S.No.459 of 2014, filed for the relief of cancellation of sale deed bearing document No.3187/2008 dated 26.06.2008 standing in the name of the first defendant. In the said suit, the petitioner earlier filed I.A.No.491 of 2014 seeking temporary injunction restraining the third respondent bank from dispossessing the petitioner from the suit schedule property till disposal of the suit. The said application was dismissed on 03.07.2015. Thereafter, it appears that the petitioner was dispossessed from the suit schedule property. After dispossession, the petitioner filed I.A.No.550 of 2015 seeking a direction from the Court to restrain the third respondent from alienating, transferring and/or conveying the suit schedule property, and when the said application is not being disposed of, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

This Court, by order dated 28.09.2015, held that the sale may go on, but it shall not be confirmed for a period of six weeks.

In view of the pendency of I.A.No.550 of 2015 in O.S.No.459 of 2014 before the learned IV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case, but disposes of this Civil Revision Petition with a direction to the learned IV Additional District Judge to take up I.A.No.550 of 2015 on a priority basis and pass appropriate orders thereon on or before 31.12.2015. At this stage, learned Counsel for the third respondent also submits that there is another application filed by the third respondent under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC for consideration before the learned District and Sessions Judge. If the notices are served on the said application

also, the said application also can be taken up for consideration and disposed of along with I.A.No.550 of 2015. It is also represented by the learned Counsel for the third respondent that the property was already sold, but in view of the orders granted by this Court on 28.09.2015, it was not confirmed. The status quo as on today shall be continued till disposal of I.A.No.550 of 2015. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________________ (A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J) 27.11.2015 vs