THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A.No.775 of 2002 JUDGMENT: Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed O.S.No.22 of 2002 in the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District against respondent Nos.3 and 4 and the appellant (defendant No.2) for cancellation of resolutions, dated 20.03.2001 and 22.04.2001, passed by respondent No.3 association. They have also filed I.A.No.96 of 2002 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. to prevent respondent Nos.3 and 4 and the appellant from alienating or otherwise dealing with the schedule properties. The application was opposed mainly by the appellant. Through its order, dated 30.01.2002, the trial Court allowed the I.A. Hence, this appeal. Heard Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the appellant. Though respondent No.1 is served with notice, he has not chosen to enter appearance. The appeal arises out of an application filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. by respondent Nos.1 and 2. The suit itself was filed in the year 2002 and it may have been disposed of by this time. Be that as it may, respondent Nos.1 and 2 evinced interest in the affairs of respondent No.3 association and they wanted to protect the interest by restricting the appellant from alienating certain items of property. The trial Court was convinced with the prima facie case and expressed the view that the balance of convenience is in restraining the appellant from alienating the property. The temporary injunction was in force for the past eight years. This Court is not inclined to interfere with the order under appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. In case the suit is still pending, the trial Court shall make an endeavour to dispose of the same, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:23.07.2010 kdl