IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2103 of 2009 BETWEEN: S.Akthar Begum, W/o.Late S.Althaf, R/o.Rayachoty Village & Mandal, Kadapa District And another …Petitioners AND S.Nauman, S/o.Late P.S.Fakruddin, Resident of Akkayapalli, Kadapa District And others …Respondents The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2103 of 2009 ORDER: The respondents filed O.S.No.2 of 2008 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Rayachoty, against the petitioner for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. They have also filed I.A.No.6 of 2008 under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, with a prayer to restrain the petitioners from alienating the suit schedule property. The trial Court allowed the I.A. through its order dated 30.01.2008. Thereupon, the petitioners filed C.M.A.No.10 of 2008 in the Court of V Additional District Judge, Rayachoty. The appeal was dismissed on 18.03.2009. Hence the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. As between the same parties, there was an earlier round of litigation. The respondents felt the necessity to seek declaration of the title and filed the present comprehensive suit. The relief claimed by them in I.A.No.6 of 2008 is almost innocuous in nature. They wanted the trial Court to restrain the petitioners from alienating the suit schedule property. As a matter of act, the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, itself is clear to the effect that any transaction that takes place during the pendency of a dispute before the Court, would not adversely affect the other party. If the petitioners are permitted to alienate the property, several complications would arise and third party rights would accrue. The trial of the suit is said to have already commenced. The trial Court can be required to dispose of the suit expeditiously. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed and the trial Court i.e. Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Rayachoty shall endeavour to dispose of the suit pending with it, as early as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY December 16, 2009 BVV