THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Civil Revision Petition Nos.1735 & 1736 of 2004 COMMON ORDER: These two revisions are between the same parties and arise out of the orders passed in the interlocutory applications, filed in the same suit. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order. The respondent filed O.S.No.182 of 2001 in the Court of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, against the petitioner, for the relief of mandatory injunction. The suit was decreed. Thereupon, the petitioner filed A.S.No.80 of 2003 in the Court of III Additional District Judge, Warangal. He filed I.A.No.689 of 2003 for stay. That was dismissed. Thereafter, he filed I.A.No.805 of 2003 for similar relief. The lower Appellate Court dismissed the same, on 28.10.2003. C.R.P.No.1736 of 2004 is filed against that order. The respondent filed E.P.No.102 of 2003. Obviously because the lower Appellate Court dismissed the application for stay, the executing Court issued warrant in terms of the decree, on 12.09.2003. C.R.P.No.1735 of 2004 arises out of that order. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Though the respondent is served with notice, he has not chosen to enter appearance. While admitting C.R.P.No.1735 of 2004, on 05.05.2004, this Court granted interim stay. The respondents did not file any application for vacating the same. The result is that for the past five years, the order of stay was operating. Further, it is not known as to whether A.S.No.80 of 2003 is still pending, or has been disposed of. Hence, the revisions are allowed, directing that, in case A.S.No.80 of 2003 has not been disposed of as yet, the decree passed by the trial Court in O.S.No.182 of 2001 shall remained stayed. If the appeal has been disposed of, the parties shall abide by the result thereof. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated:27.08.2009. GJ