THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.M.A. No.482 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioners filed O.S.No.49 of 2009 in the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam against the respondents for the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule properties. The petitioners, respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are sons of respondent No.1 and late Ramanayya. It was pleaded that the petitioners and respondent Nos.1 to 4 have equal rights in the suit schedule properties and in spite of repeated demands, partition was not effected. The petitioners filed I.A.No.179 of 2009 under Order 39 Rule 1 C.P.C. to restrain respondent No.5 i.e. State Bank of India, Nowpada, Santhabommali Mandal, Srikakulam District from proceeding against the suit schedule properties. It was pleaded that respondent No.1 borrowed loan from respondent No.5-Bank which is not at all for the benefit of the family and for clearance of the same, the property is being sold. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. Even according to the petitioners, the suit schedule properties are held in common and joint. It is not a case where respondent No.1 borrowed any amount for herself. It is stated to be for construction of a Rice Mill and incidentally, the Rice Mill itself is one of the items of the property. In case respondent No.5 is restrained from proceeding against the properties, there is every likelihood of the loan multiplying manifold leading to extensive liability on all the parties. The trial Court has considered the matter from correct perspective and this Court is not inclined to take a different view. The civil revision petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:12.07.2010 kdl