THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1609 OF 2007 DATED:08.04.2011 Between: Kallem Penta Reddy. .... PETITIONER And Yattam Jangaiah & 8 others. .... RESPONDENTS ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 22.02.2007, in I.A.No.4659 of 2006 in I.A.No.8022 of 2001 in O.S.No.1293 of 2001 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Rangareddy District, wherein the application filed by the petitioner herein seeking police aid to protect the petitioner’s possession, was dismissed. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. Petitioner herein filed the suit for permanent injunction and also I.A.No.8022 of 2001 for temporary injunction. By order, dated 31.03.2002, the said application was dismissed. Petitioner filed C.M.A.No.91 of 2003. By order, dated 03.02.2005, the appellate Court allowed the appeal and granted interim injunction. Petitioner thereafter filed I.A.No.4659 of 2006 seeking police aid for implementation of the order of interim injunction. Respondents filed a counter opposing the same. By impugned order, dated 22.02.2007, the trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that it was not necessary to extend police protection to the petitioner’s possession six years after filing of the suit. Now, another four years have lapsed since the passing of the impugned order. It is stated that the trial of the suit is in progress. At this stage, it is considered neither just nor desirable to grant any police aid for protection of the petitioner’s possession over the schedule land. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner apprehends that there may be some law and order problem if police protection is not granted. 5. When there has been no problem since the past ten years since filing of the suit, the apprehension now expressed appears to be baseless. However, in the event of there being any specific incident, involving illegal activity on the part of the respondents, it is open to the petitioner to take recourse to criminal proceedings. 6. Having regard to the fact that the suit is of the year, 2001 and it is stated to be clubbed with another suit of the year, 1999, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit itself at an early date, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. Accordingly, Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 08th April, 2011. Tsy