THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3917 of 2005 ORDER: The petitioners filed O.S.No.207 of 2002 against the respondents in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Chodavaram for the relief of perpetual injunction. They have also filed I.A.No.576 of 2002 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. The trial Court dismissed the same, through order, dated 04.07.2003. Thereupon, the petitioners filed C.M.A.No.7 of 2003 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Chodavaram. The appeal was dismissed on 23.03.2005. Hence, this revision. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. The suit was filed for the relief of perpetual injunction in respect of the use of the suit schedule property. The petitioners did not claim any individual rights in themselves for that land. Their plea was that the land was being utilized for communal purpose and for performance of ceremonies and functions at Atchiyamma Perantallu Temple. Alleging that the second respondent is trying to make construction over the suit schedule property, I.A.No.567 of 2002 was filed for temporary injunction. The contest was mostly by the second respondent. He pleaded that the land was assigned to him and that he commenced the construction. The trial Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner and a report was submitted to the effect that the construction has already been commenced. Taking note of the same, the trial Court dismissed the I.A. and the same was affirmed by the lower appellate Court. While admitting the revision, this Court granted temporary injunction on 30.09.2005. The controversy is only as regards the use of the suit schedule property as passage. The record discloses that the second respondent has already constructed a house. At this stage, the construction cannot be disturbed. At the same time, if there exists any possibility to exercise the right of passage over the suit schedule property, despite existence of house, the same shall not be interrupted by the respondents. The civil revision petition is accordingly disposed of, directing that temporary injunction as prayed for is granted in favour of the petitioners, however, subject to the condition that the same shall not result in any damage to or prevention of use of the house constructed by the second respondent. The petitioners shall be entitled to exercise the right of passage subject to that condition. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:27.08.2009 kdl