THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4938 OF 2009. DATED:11-03-2010. Between: K.Rajalingu and two others … Petitioners-Plaintiffs and P.Venkatesham and another …Respondents-Defendants THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.4938 OF 2009. ORDER: This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order, dated 21-07-2009, in C.M.A.No.34 of 2008, on the file of the V Additional District Judge, Karimnagar, in setting aside the order, dated 30-11- 2007, in I.A.No.174 of 2007 in O.S.No.21 of 2007, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Manthani, wherein the application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC to grant temporary injunction against the defendants was allowed. 2. The trial Court after considering the documentary evidence available on record, granted temporary injunction restraining the defendants and their men etc., from interfering with the plaintiffs possession over the suit schedule property in respect of Ac.0.31 guntas in Survey No.104 of Rampikunta village on the ground that Khasra pahanies and revenue officials report are not tallying with the extent of land with that of the extent as mentioned in Ex.A1. But, the appellate Court reversed the said finding. Hence, this revision. 3. It is not in dispute that the respondents herein have no land in Survey No.104. Similarly, the petitioners herein have no land in Survey No.105-E. Grant or refusal of injunction is guided by three well established principles viz., 1) If the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case, 2) If the balance of convenience is in his favour i.e., it would be greater inconvenience to the plaintiff if the injunction is not granted than the inconvenience which the defendant would be put to if the temporary injunction is granted and 3) If the plaintiff suffers irreparable injury. Prima facie case has been established by the petitioners that they are having title to an extent of Ac.0.31 guntas of land in Survey No.104 by virtue of Ex.A1-gift deed. Similarly, by virtue of Exs.A3 and A4- pattadar pass books, petitioners were having right, title and interest in respect of Survey No.104. Ex.A7 is the certified copy of pahani, which shows that the petitioners were in possession of the property in Survey No.104. Though the respondents also filed simple sale deeds Exs.B1 and B2 and also registered sale deeds Exs.B3 and B4, they only go to show that they got title in respect of land in Survey No.105-E. Therefore, the respondents have no manner of right to interfere with the land in Survey No.104. Prima facie case and balance of convenience are in favour of the petitioners. Therefore, interim injunction is granted insofar as Ac.0.31 guntas of land in Survey No.104 of Rompikunta village. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED:11-03-2010 Hsd