THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5395 OF 2005 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 06.10.2005, in C.M.A.No.2 of 2004 on the file of the learned V Additional District Judge (FTC), Rangareddy District, wherein the said appeal filed by the respondent herein, was allowed setting aside the order, dated 11.11.2003 in I.A.No.411 of 2003 in O.S.No.190 of 2003 on the file of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Hyderabad West and South, Rangareddy District. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the records. 3. Petitioner herein filed the suit against the respondent for permanent injunction claiming to be the absolute owner of the plaint schedule land. Respondent filed written statement contesting the suit. Petitioner also filed I.A.No.411 of 2003 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking temporary injunction pending disposal of the suit. Respondent opposed the same. After due enquiry, the trial Court by order, dated 11.11.2003, allowed the application and granted temporary injunction. Aggrieved by the same, respondent preferred an appeal in C.M.A.No.2 of 2004. The learned Additional District Judge by the impugned order, dated 06.10.1995, allowed the said appeal, setting aside the order of injunction granted by the trial Court. Assailing the same, plaintiff filed the present revision. This Court on 20.10.2005, while ordering notice before admission, directed both parties to maintain status quo till the final disposal of the Civil Revision Petition. The suit itself is one for permanent injunction and it was filed in the year, 2003, and is ripe for disposal. 4. During enquiry before the trial Court in I.A.No.411 of 2003, Exs.A1 to A9 were marked on behalf of the plaintiff and Exs.B1 to B.18 were marked on behalf of the defendant. 5. The said documents and the rival contentions of both parties on the aspect, pertaining to the grant of temporary injunction, do arise for consideration during the trial of the suit also. It is therefore considered inappropriate at this length of time, about eight years after filing of the suit, to go into the merits of the case regarding the claim of possession or grant of refusal of injunction, as the same falls for consideration in greater detail before the trial Court on evidence that may be adduced during the course of the trial. 6. In the circumstances, it is considered that the ends of justice would be met by directing the trial Court to dispose of the suit at an early date, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both parties shall maintain status quo obtaining as on today in respect of the suit property till the disposal of the suit. 7. Civil Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 25th August, 2011. Tsy