IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 731 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 01/05/2008 in WP NO : 1289 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Sunkara Sreekrishna S/o. Sri. S.V.B.Naidu R/o. Flat No.3, III Floor, Surekha Towers, Opp: Fire Station, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Divisional Office, GVR Towers, 3rd Floor, Bharathi Nagar, Ring Road, Vijayawada - 520 008, Rep. by its Senior Divisional Retail Sales Manager. 2 Bonam Srirama Krishna S/o.Sri Suryaprakasa Rao R/o. Burugupally, Yelamanchili Mandal, West Godavari District. 3 M/s. S.V.B.Naidu, A partnership firm, Indian Oil Dealer, Rep. by Sri Bonam Srirama Krishna, Tagore Road, Machilipatnam. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:SMT.N.(P).ANJANA DEVI, SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.P.V.SANJAY KUMAR The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, CJ) Being aggrieved by the order dated 1-5-2008 passed in W.P.M.P.No. 1543 of 2008 in W.P.No. 1289 of 2008, this appeal has been filed. By virtue of the impugned order, grant of interim relief was refused to the appellant-petitioner. In our opinion, grant of interim relief would have amounted to allowing the petition, and, therefore, the learned Single Judge rightly did not grant any interim relief. The question, which is pending before the learned Single Judge is with regard to determination of legality of termination of retail outlet dealership in favour of M/s Sunkara Veerabrahmam at Machilipatnam, Krishna District. By an order dated 26-11-2007, the said retail outlet dealership has been cancelled and the said order has been challenged in the petition. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge rightly did not grant any interim relief, because, grant of interim relief would have amounted to allowing the petition at the interim stage. In the circumstances, we do not find any substance in the appeal and the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. Looking to the facts of the case, it is directed that the writ petition shall be notified for final hearing before the learned Single Judge in the 2nd week of November, 2008. ______________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 21st July, 2008. _________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J GRR