THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4099 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners/defendants filed this Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 31.07.2009 passed by the X Additional District Judge, Krishna, whereby the learned Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the order dated 02.06.2008 passed by the Junior Civil Judge, Kaikalur in I.A.No.388 of 2007 in O.S.No.221 of 2007. The respondents/plaintiffs filed O.S.No.221 of 2007 for permanent injunction. Pending the suit, they filed I.A.No.388 of 2007 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Section 151 C.P.C to grant temporary injunction. The Junior Civil Judge, Kaikalur, by order dated 02.06.2008, granted temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs based upon Exs.A.1 and A.2-gift deeds, which were executed in favour of the plaintiffs by their mother in respect of an extent of Ac.0.60 cents of land out of Ac.1.88 cents in R.S.No.1046/2C situated at Guravaipalem Village. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners/defendants filed the appeal contending that an extent of Ac.1.38 cents was registered in the name of the first defendant under the registered gift deed dated 07.04.2000 and that pattadar pass book and title deed were also issued in his favour in respect of the said property. The lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal holding that whether the mother of the plaintiffs, who executed Exs.A.1 and A.2 gift deeds, would have a title to the same or not can be gone into in the main suit and that since the petitioners/plaintiffs prima facie established their possession over the petition schedule property there is nothing wrong in granting interim injunction in their favour by the lower Court. Heard both sides and perused the entire material available on record. In the affidavit filed in support of C.R.P.M.P.No.5625 of 2009, it is stated that the said injunction granted by the trial Court in I.A.No.388 of 2007 in O.S.No.221 of 2007 was stayed by the lower appellate Court on 11.06.2008 till 09.07.2008 only and thereafter it has not been extended. Further, this Court, while issuing Notice before admission, on 28.08.2009, suspended the injunction order granted by the trial Court in I.A.No.388 of 2007 in O.S.No.221 of 2007 only for a period of eight (8) weeks and thereafter it has not been extended. From the above, it is clear that injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs was stayed for intermittent periods only. In view of the same and since the plaintiffs prima facie proved their possession over the suit schedule property, no infirmity is discernable in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the lower Court is directed to dispose of the suit uninfluenced by any of the observations made by this Court. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J Date: 22.07.2011 va