IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINTEENTH (19TH) DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.4283 of 2009 Between: VR Sairaj … Petitioner And: V R Shanmugham & others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.4283 of 2009 ORDER: This revision is directed against the order dated 13.08.2009 in IA No.172 of 2008 in IA No.1718 of 2004 in OS No.421 of 1988 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Secunderabad, wherein the plaintiff was permitted to occupy the bed room without having attached toilet facility and permitted to use the kitchen, pooja and hall commonly and the petitioner herein-2nd defendant, who was permitted to use the bed room of attached bath room and toilets exclusively till new toilet and bath room are constructed. The Bailiff was further directed to deliver possession of the bed room allotted to the plaintiff. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-2nd defendant and the learned counsel for the first respondent-plaintiff. Perused the record. 3. The first respondent herein filed suit against his mother, brothers and sisters for partition of the plaint schedule property and a preliminary decree was passed on 11.06.1993 following the compromise between the parties. The plaintiff filed application for appointment of the Commissioner for effecting division by metes and bounds and allot the plaintiff his share in the suit property. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed for the said purpose. The plaintiff filed IA No.172 of 2008 seeking a direction to the petitioner herein-2nd defendant to deliver portion of the house bearing D.No.274, Chintal Bazar, Bollarum, Secunderabad to the plaintiff for his residential purpose. The trial court allowed the said application. Aggrieved by the same, the 2nd defendant filed CRP No.3893 of 2008. This court by order dated 3.06.2009 disposed of the said revision permitting the plaintiff to occupy half of the premises in question till completion of the final decree proceedings. In the said order, it was further noted that the Commissioner has already filed his report and the same is pending consideration by the trial court. The trial court was further directed to dispose of the final decree proceedings within three months. Though the said order was passed on 03.06.2009 it is stated that the final decree proceedings are still pending. On 13.08.2009 the impugned order was passed virtually making apportionment of the house among the parties, directing that the plaintiff be permitted to occupy the bed room without toilet facility and the 2nd defendant shall occupy the bed room with toilet facility and both of them shall use the kitchen, pooja and hall jointly, with further direction that till new toilet and bath room are constructed for the plaintiff, he shall be permitted to use the toilet and bath room attached to the bed room allotted to the 2nd defendant. 4. Having regard to the fact that the parties, though closely related, are engaged in long drawn litigation, notwithstanding their advanced age, the arrangement sought to be made by the trial Court in the impugned order, that too, as an interim measure, does not appear to be workable. This Court by order dated 03.06.2009 permitted the plaintiff to occupy half of the premises in question till completion of the final decree proceedings, having regard to the age of the plaintiff, who is a senior citizen. Even the said direction was an interim measure pending disposal of the final decree proceedings. The trial court ought to have concluded the final decree proceedings as directed by this court in the order dated 03.06.2009. Instead, the impugned order came to be passed giving certain directions, which are in the nature of modifying the order passed by this court. The arrangement and allotment as proposed in the impugned order is not in accordance with the directions given by this court in the order dated 03.06.2009 in CRP No.3893 of 2008, wherein it was directed the plaintiff was permitted to occupy the half of the premises till completion of the final decree proceedings. On that ground itself, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. The trial Court shall conclude the final decree proceedings within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order and both parties shall cooperate for early conclusion of the proceedings before the trial Court, without trying to further protract and prolong the litigation. In the event of non cooperation by either of the parties, it shall be open to the trial court to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 5. In the result, the civil revision petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 19.07.2011 bss