IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD Thursday, September 15, 2011. Present: The Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar C.R.P. No. 4639 of 2007 Between: Raju @ Venkata Narahari Rao and another ..Petitioners and Nakka Nagaiah and others …Respondents The Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar C.R.P. No. 4639 of 2007 O r d e r : Respondent No.1 herein claiming to be a protected tenant along with Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, who are said to be transferees from the first respondent filed O.S.No. 2954 of 2006 before the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar. Along with the suit, the respondents have also filed an application for temporary injunction in I.A.No. 4715 of 2006. The petitioners herein have filed written statement in the suit and also contested the application for temporary injunction. However, by order dated:8-6-2007 the trial court granted temporary injunction and as against the same petitioners herein filed C.M.A.No. 140 of 2007 before the learned I Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District. The said appeal on contest was dismissed by the appellate court by its order dated:10.9.2007 with an observation that any improvements or constructions made therein shall be subject to the result of the main suit. Questioning the said appellate order, the present revision petition is filed. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and also the respondents. 3. This revision petition was admitted on 12.10.2007 and vide orders in C.R.P.M.P.No. 6124 of 2007 status quo order was passed, which was extended from time to time and continues to remain in force as on today. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the courts below have not properly appreciated their prima facie case and balance of convenience and also did not appreciate the documents filed by them. It is also their contention that the first respondent was not declared as a protected tenant and his tenancy rights were also not adjudicated upon under the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act and the question of jurisdiction of civil court was also raised. I am not inclined into go into this aspect, in view of the fact that there has been an injunction operating in favour of the present respondents right from 08- 06-2007, which has been confirmed by the appellate court and the order of status quo passed in the present revision is in operation since 12.10.2007. 5. Since the suit is of the year 2006, being O.S.No. 2954 of 2006, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this civil revision petition directing that the status quo granted by this court on 12.10.2007 shall continue to operate during the pendency of the suit and the trial court shall endeavor to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, in any case within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. The petitioners, as well as the respondents herein are at liberty to urge all the contentions raised herein, before the trial court, in the main suit. 7. With the above directions, the civil revision petition stands disposed. In the circumstances, the parties are directed to bear their own costs. ___________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J. September 15, 2011. *BVS