THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. NO. 435 OF 2009 Date of Judgment: 15.11.2010 Between: Kolluru Prabhavati …Petitioner and Kolluru Venkata Jagan Mohana Rao and others ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P.NO. 435 OF 2009 ORDER: This revision petition is filed by the first defendant. The suit is for partition and when it was at the stage of defendants’ evidence, the impugned order was passed by the trial Court on 2.12.2008 in IA No. 1031 of 2007. Now the suit itself might have been disposed of, but both the learned counsel for the parties are not able to confirm the same. The plaintiff filed an application pending the suit praying that he be provided a room in one of the portions of ‘A’ suit schedule which is western portion on the ground that the eastern portion where he was residing was in a dilapidated condition and was in danger of being collapsed. The said application has been allowed by the trial Court under the impugned order. Hence this revision by the first defendant. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The impugned order of the trial Court was suspended by this Court on 7.8.2009 while issuing notice before admission. Since the suit for partition can at best result in a decree in favour of plaintiff for a specified share in the suit schedule property, the relief of allotting one room on western side which is sought for by the plaintiff in the application, to my mind, was beyond the scope of the suit itself. The plaintiff on his own showing is residing in eastern portion which, according to him, is in a dilapidated condition. He does not state in the affidavit that any other portion of the suit schedule property is vacant, but he seeks allotment of some other rooms which are in good condition. Such a relief sought for at the interlocutory stage pending the suit was clearly misconceived and the court below committed an error in allowing the said application. The impugned order, therefore, is clearly not sustainable and is liable to be set aside. The revision petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the trial Court shall proceed with the suit and decide the same expeditiously before 31st December, 2010, if it has not been so far disposed of. No costs. _________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 15.11.2010 KR