IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO :1248 of 2010 Dated: 25.3.2010 Between: Gaddagunti Darshan ..... PETITIONER AND 1. G. Raju and others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:1248 OF 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order, dated 5.11.2009 passed in I.A.No.1399 of 2009 in I.A.No.866 of 2009 in O.S.No:149 of 2009 by the learned Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The petitioner is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants. The plaintiff filed the above application contending that the Court below has granted ad interim injunction restraining respondent No.18 or the persons claiming under him from raising any type of construction in any part of the schedule property, but respondent No.18 is proceeding with the construction inspite of the orders passed by the Court and he complained the same to the Saidabad Police, but they did not take any action and therefore, police aid may be provided to enforce the orders of the Court below. The Court below dismissed the above application. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been filed. Heard the learned Counsel and perused the material available on record. From the material on record, it is apparent that on 5.3.2009, in I.A.No.866 of 2009, the Court below directed both the parties to maintain status quo as on that date. Subsequent thereto, the plaintiff filed an application in I.A.2573 of 2009 under Order XXXIX Rule 2 (A) CPC complaining that respondent No.18 violated the orders of the Court. The said application is pending before the Court below. Pending adjudication of I.A.No.2573 of 2009 and the main injunction petition, the approach of the plaintiff with the present application insisting to provide police aid to enforce the order, dated 5.3.2009 is unsustainable as observed by the Court below. In this view of the matter, I have no hesitation to hold that the Court below is justified in passing the order under revision. Hence, the Civil revision Petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari Date: 25th March, 2010 Nn. HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENAKUMARI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No:1248 OF 2010 25.03.2010