HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4079 OF 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioner against the order dated 12-08-2010 in I.A. No.510 of 2010 in O.S. No.95 of 2010 passed by the Presiding Officer, A.P. State Wakf Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner herein is the 1st defendant and the respondents are the plaintiffs before the Tribunal. 3. The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration and recovery of possession against defendants 1 and 2. Along with the suit, they also filed the impugned I.A. seeking temporary injunction in their favour restraining the 1st defendant from constructing any structures over the schedule Wakf property. 4. The Wakf Tribunal issued ex parte temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs. It is observed by the Tribunal that no caveat is pending and no irreparable loss would be caused to the defendants, if they are restrained from proceeding with the constructions. Aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed by the 1st defendant. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner - 1st defendant submitted that he has already filed O.S. No.528 of 2009 in the Court of XI Junior Civil Judge, Secunderabad against plaintiffs herein in respect of the property in dispute, and that he obtained injunction order in I.A. No.764 of 2009 restraining the plaintiffs herein from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and that interim order is still in force. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Wakf Tribunal with regard to the same property, cannot be maintained. 6. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. 7. The case of the 1st defendant is that he obtained injunction against the plaintiffs in respect of the property in question and therefore, the injunction order is not maintainable. The order impugned herein is an ex parte injunction. The 1st defendant can raise the contentions, that were urged before this Court and he can move appropriate application before the Court below seeking to vacate the interim injunction. Instead of availing those remedies, the approach of the 1st defendant to this Court is nothing but a premature one. Therefore, the Civil Revision Petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ T. MEENA KUMARI, J September 09, 2010. KTL