THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.4165 of 2010 Date:15th March, 2011 Between: Cheekumunthala Peddaiah ..... Petitioner/Plaintiff AND Pathugudi Anjaneyulu .....Respondent/Defendant *** THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.4165 of 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 02.09.2010 passed in I.A.No.292 of 2010 in I.A.No.33 of 2009 in O.S.No.10 of 2009 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Jadcherla, whereby and whereby the learned Junior Civil Judge dismissed the application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff under Section 151 CPC. 2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.10 of 2009. The respondent is the defendant in the said suit. The plaintiff filed the suit for injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. He also moved I.A.No.33 of 2009 seeking for temporary injunction. The said I.A. came to be allowed on 06.04.2010 granting temporary injunction. The petitioner/plaintiff filed I.A.No.292 of 2010 under Section 151 CPC seeking police protection for effective implementatrion of the order dated 06.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.33 of 2009. The learned Junior Civil Judge, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the counsel appearing for the parties, proceeded to dismiss the application, by order dated 02.09.2010. Hence, this revision. 3. Notice before admission came to be ordered on 15.09.2010. The respondent entered appearance through a counsel. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff and learned counsel appearing for the respondent/defendant. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/defendant submits that the order dated 06.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.33 of 2009 in O.S.No.10 of 2009 has been challenged by the respondent/defendant by filing C.M.A.No.24 of 2010 before the District Court and the said CMA came to be allowed setting aside the order dated 06.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.33 of 2009 remanding the matter back to the trial Court, in which case, the very application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff seeking police protection for implementation of the order is unsustainable. 6. The factual aspect of the order dated 06.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.33 of 2009 being set aside in the appeal preferred by the respondent/defendant is not contradicted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff. Since the order dated 06.04.2010 passed in I.A.No.33 of 2009 has been set aside by the appellate court, question of granting any police protection for implementation of the said order does not arise. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed at the admission stage. However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of I.A.No.33 of 2009 in O.S.No.10 of 2009, uninfluenced by any of the observations made in this order. No costs. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:15th March, 2011. cs THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Civil Revision Petition No.4165 of 2010 Date:15th March, 2011