S. Nirmala v. Genome Foundation

THE HON'BLE Dr . JUSTI CE SHAMEEM AKTHER Civil Revision Pet it ion No.2 1 0 2 of 2 0 1 9 ORDER:

This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner/ plaintiff, challenging the judgment, dated 28.06.2019, passed in C.M.A.No.94 of 2013 by the III Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. 2 .

The facts that led to filing of this Civil Revision Petition, in brief, are as follows:

Initially, the petitioner/ plaintiff filed a suit for perpetual injunction in O.S.No.440 of 2011 before the Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, against the respondent/ defendant. In that suit, the petitioner/ plaintiff filed an Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.1031 of 2011 before the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of C.P.C., for grant of interim injunction restraining the respondent/ defendant, his men and agents from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner/ plaintiff over the suit schedule property. The said interlocutory application was disposed of by the learned III Additional Junior Civil Judge, by order, dated 02.05.

2012, directing both the parties to maintain status quo till the disposal of the main suit. Aggrieved by the same, respondent/ defendant filed an appeal in C.M.A.No.94 of 2013, before the III Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. The learned III Additional District Judge, vide order, dated 28.06.

- 2 - passed by the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, in I.A.No.1031 of 2011 in O.S.No.440 of 2011. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/ plaintiff filed this Civil Revision Petition.

3 .

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/ plaintiff and perused the record.

4 .

In the course of submissions, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the main suit before the trial Court is coming up for arguments. Since entire evidence is recorded and the main suit is coming up for arguments, at this juncture, it is not appropriate to express any opinion by this Court with regard to the merits and demerits of the matter. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the Presiding Officer of the trial Court was transferred some time back. Under these circumstances, the regular Presiding Officer or the Officer holding Full Additional Charge of the Court of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, as the case may be, is directed to dispose of O.S.No.440 of 2011 pending on its file, within a period of sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5 .

With the above direction, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Civil Revision Petition, shall stand closed.

______________________ Dr . SHAMEEM AKTHER, J 19th September, 2019 Bvv