THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI Civil Revision Petition Nos.2049 and 2111 of 2011 Dated: 27.06.2011 C.R.P.No.2049 of 2011 Between: Taarakaraju Venkata Ratnakar Raju, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. … Petitioner And Smt. G.Jyothi, Secunderabad. … Respondent C.R.P.No.2111 of 2011 Between: Taarakaraju Venkata Ratnakar Raju, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. … Petitioner And Smt. G.Jyothi, Secunderabad. … Respondent THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI Civil Revision Petition Nos.2049 and 2111 of 2011 COMMON ORDER : Both the Civil Revision Petitions are filed by Taarakaraju Venkata Ratnakar Raju, who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.475 of 2009 and the defendant in O.S.No.504 of 2009. Both the suits are pending on the file of the Court of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad, Kukatpally. O.S.No.475 of 2009 has been filed for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant/respondent herein and two others from interfering with the suit schedule property i.e., Plot bearing No.163/A admeasuring 200 sq. yards situated in Sy.No.206 of Kondapur Village, R.R. District. Along with the suit, he filed I.A.No.799 of 2009 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. for temporary injunction. The respondent herein who also claims title and possession in respect of the very same plot bearing No.163/A, filed O.S.No.504 of 2009 for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant/Revision petitioner from interfering with her possession and enjoyment of the said property. Along with the suit, she filed I.A.No.840 of 2009 under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of C.P.C. for temporary injunction. The learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kukatpally, heard both I.A.No.799 of 2009 in O.S.No.475 of 2009 and I.A.No.840 of 2009 in O.S.No.504 of 2009 together and by common order dated 14.12.2009 allowed I.A.No.840 of 2009 in O.S.No.504 of 2009 and dismissed I.A.No.799 of 2009 in O.S.No.475 of 2009. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revision petitioner filed C.M.A.No.790 of 2009 and I.A.No.791 of 2009 in the Court of the II-Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B. Nagar against the orders in I.A.No.840 of 2009 and I.A.No.799 of 2009 respectively. The lower Appellate Court by common judgment dated 15.04.2011 dismissed both the Appeals confirming the orders passed by the trial Court. Hence these two Revision Petitions i.e., C.R.P.No.2049 of 2011 against the judgment in C.M.A.No.790 of 2009 and C.R.P.No.2111 of 2011 against the judgment in C.M.A.No.791 of 2009 on the file of the Court of II- Additional District Judge, Rangareddy at L.B. Nagar. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents. Admittedly both the parties claiming title and possession in respect of the very same property. As could be seen, whereas the revision petitioner claims to have purchased the suit property under an Agreement of Sale, dated 9.12.1985, the respondent claims to have purchased the said property from the very same vendor under a Registered Sale Deed, dated 1.4.1999. The suits filed by both parties are pending and the rival claims made by them are to be established on the basis of the evidence that may be adduced by them in the main suits. Though the petitioner’s application for temporary injunction in O.S.No.475 of 2009 was dismissed, it is not disputed before this Court that during pendency of the appeals in the Court of the II-Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District an order of status quo was in operation throughout. In the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the rival claims made by the parties, I am of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the same order of status quo is continued till the main suits are decided on merits. Accordingly, both the Civil Revision Petitions are disposed of directing that the status quo which was in operation during the pendency of C.M.A.Nos.790 and 791 of 2009 on the file of Court of II-Additional District Judge, Rangareddy District at L.B.Nagar shall be maintained by both the parties till the main suits are heard and decided. There shall also be a direction that the main suits shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. Both the Civil Revision Petitions are accordingly disposed of. No costs. _______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 27.06.2011 Note: Issue C.C. in three days. KLP