THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2809 OF 2011 Dated:18.08.2011 Between: Marla Suryanarayana Murthy .. Petitioner And Marla Venkata Ranga Sesha Sai and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2809 OF 2011 ORDER: The revision is filed complaining that the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Special Officer, Kakinada, under the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 is not expeditiously disposing of I.A.No.129 of 2010 in A.T.C.No.10 of 2010. The above mentioned A.T.C. was filed by the first respondent herein against the petitioner and the second respondent seeking a declaration that he is the cultivating tenant of the petition schedule land and that the petitioner herein is trying to interfere with his possession. In I.A.No.129 of 2010, the learned Special Officer passed an ex parte reasoned order on 18.06.2010. After receiving notice, the petitioner filed counter on 01.07.2010. The same is being adjourned. The counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the latest decision of the Supreme Court in Ramrameshwari Devi v. Nirmala Devi[1] in support of his contention that whenever ex parte ad interim injunctions are granted, the application should be disposed of expeditiously after hearing both sides. In the above mentioned case, the Supreme Court expressed anguish on the way “the civil litigation moves in our Courts and how unscrupulous litigants can till eternity harass the respondents and their children by abusing the judicial system …… and opined that such existing system can be drastically changed or improved if the following steps are taken by the lower Court while dealing with the civil trials. A. Pleadings are foundation of the claims of parties. Civil litigation is largely based on documents. It is the bounden duty and obligation of the trial judge to carefully scrutinize, check and verify the pleadings and the documents filed by the parties. This must be done immediately after civil suits are filed. B. The Court should resort to discovery and production of documents and interrogatories at the earliest according to the object of the Code. If this exercise is carefully carried out, it would focus the controversies involved in the case and help the court in arriving at truth of the matter and doing substantial justice. C. Imposition of actual, realistic or proper costs and/or ordering prosecution would go a long way in controlling the tendency of introducing false pleadings and forged and fabricated documents by the litigants. Imposition of heavy costs would also control unnecessary adjournments by the parties. In appropriate cases the courts may consider ordering production otherwise it may not be possible to maintain purity and sanctity of judicial proceedings. D. The Court must adopt realistic and pragmatic approach in granting mesne profits. The Court must carefully keep in view the ground realities while granting mesne profits. E. The courts should be extremely careful and cautious in granting ex parte ad interim injunctions or stay orders. Ordinarily short notice should be issued to the defendants or respondents and only after hearing concerned parties appropriate orders should be passed. F. Litigants who obtained ex parte ad interim injunction on the strength of false pleadings and forged documents should be adequately punished. No one should be allowed to abuse the process of the court. G. The principle of restitution be fully applied in a pragmatic manner in order to do real and substantial justice. H. Every case emanates from a human or a commercial problem and the Court must make serious endeavour to resolve the problem within the framework of law and in accordance with the well settled principles of law and justice. I. If in a given case, ex parte injunction is granted, then the said application for grant of injunction should be disposed of on merits, after hearing both sides as expeditiously as may be possible on a priority basis and undue adjournments should be avoided. J. At the time of filing of the plaint, the trial court should prepare complete schedule and fix dates for all the stages of the suit, right from filing of the written statement till pronouncement of judgment and the courts should strictly adhere to the said dates and the said time table as far as possible. If any interlocutory application is filed then the same be disposed of in between the said dates of hearings fixed in the said suit itself so that the date fixed for the main suit may not be disturbed.” (Emphasis supplied) The guideline (I) above deals with ex parte injunctions and it requires all applications for injunction should be taken up on priority basis and dispose of expeditiously avoiding undue adjournments. The petitioner is given liberty to bring the above principles to the notice of the lower Court and seek hearing on priority basis. The Civil Revision Petition, with the above observations, is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) 18.08.2011 KH [1] 2011 (5) SCJ 570