THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Civil Revision Petition No.1850 of 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order, dated 16.11.2009, passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad in I.A.No.2238 of 2009 in O.S.No.1307 of 2009. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. The petitioner filed O.S.No.1307 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District against the respondents seeking perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property viz., Shop No.G-5 in S.R.Towers MIG House bearing Nos.256 to 258, Road No.4, KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, wherein he claims to be running a clinic under the name and style ‘Sri Sai Fracture Artho Clinic’. Along with the suit, he also filed an application seeking temporary injunction and the trial Court by order, dated 24.07.2009, directed the respondents to maintain status quo. While so, the petitioner filed the present application, in I.A.No.2238 of 2009, under Section 151 of CPC praying the Court to direct the respondents to handover the duplicate keys of the rolling shutters of the subject premises or in alternative, to permit him to prepare a duplicate key contending that the third respondent, who is holding the keys, is opening and closing the shutters according to his whims and fancies, thereby causing inconvenience to him as well as to his patients by delaying one or two hours and making them to wait outside. The second respondent filed counter opposing the application. The trial Court, having considered the rival contentions and the material available on record, observed that the status quo order granted on 24.07.2009 has been in force and if at all, the respondents have violated the status quo orders, the petitioner ought to have filed an application against the respondents for violating the said orders, and instead of doing so, he filed the present application seeking the relief which is contrary to the main relief. Accordingly, the trial Court dismissed the application through the impugned order, dated 16.11.2009, observing that the rival contentions advanced by both parties have to be gone into at the time of deciding the main suit. In view of the cogent reasons given by the trial Court while dismissing the application, this Court discerns no infirmity whatsoever warranting interference with the impugned order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The civil revision petition fails and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition is dismissed, at the admission stage. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:21.06.2010 VGB