THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6320 of 2009 ORDER: 1. This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 08.12.2009 in I.A. No.880 of 2009 in I.A. No.367 of 2009 in O.S. No.161 of 2009 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kavali, whereunder and whereby police aid was granted to the first respondent herein to protect her possession and enjoyment over the schedule property. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Admittedly, no ad-interim injunction was granted against the petitioner herein, who is the first defendant in the suit. However, on a petition filed by the first respondent herein, who is the plaintiff, police aid was given in so far as second respondent herein, who is the second defendant, is concerned. Counter has been filed in the trial Court by the second respondent herein stating that he is not in possession of the schedule property. When the second respondent is not in possession of the property in question, the question of providing police aid against him does not arise. Therefore, in the circumstances of the case, the trial Court exceeded its jurisdiction in granting police aid, and so, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 4. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, allowed setting aside the impugned order. No costs. However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of I.A. No.367 of 2009 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in accordance with law after hearing both sides. It is made clear that if the second respondent herein has violated any injunction orders, the petitioner can seek redressal in accordance with law. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 16.04.2010 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6320 of 2009 16.04.2010 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 6320 of 2009 16.04.2010 Between: Marthula Ramamurthy Reddy …Petitioner And Martula Hima Sailaja & others …Respondents