THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.No.1853 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner filed O.S.No.225 of 2005 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chirala, against the respondent, for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction, in respect of the suit schedule property. She has also filed I.A.No.1288 of 2005 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. The I.A. was allowed on 21.03.2006. Thereupon, the respondent filed C.M.A.No.16 of 2006 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala. The Appellate Court allowed the C.M.A., through order dated 06.11.2007. Hence, this revision. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Though three years have elapsed, ever since this Court ordered notice, it appears that the notice was not served yet. The dispute is in respect of an extent of Ac.1.00 of agricultural land. The trial Court allowed the I.A., without there being any evidence on record. The Appellate Court took the view that there was no justification for grant of injunction, in the absence of any evidence supporting the case of the petitioner. In a suit for declaration, the plaintiff is required to trace the source of title. Even in an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., the source of title and nature of possession were required to be established. The petitioner did not choose to place any material before the trial Court, to substantiate her contention, as to possession. In the absence of any evidence, injunction could have been granted, only when the respondent in the I.A. admitted the facts pleaded by the petitioner. Hence, the Appellate Court had allowed the C.M.A. and vacated the order of temporary injunction. This Court is not inclined to take a different view. Further, while ordering notice, this Court passed an order of status quo on 28.04.2008, to be in force till the next date of hearing. The matter was listed on 14.08.2008 and on subsequent dates. The interim order, dated 28.04.2008, was not extended. Viewed from any angle, this Court is not inclined to grant any relief to the petitioner in this C.R.P. The C.R.P. is accordingly dismissed. The trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the suit, as early as possible, preferably by the end of this year. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated: 24.06.2011 GJ