THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1134 of 2011 Date of Order: 17.06.2011 Between: Vissamsetti Veera Babu and others ..Petitioners And Puppala Anka Nagulu and others ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1134 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This revision is filed by the petitioners/defendant Nos.1 to 3 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to revise the order of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Avanigadda, dated 21.03.2011, in allowing I.A.No.503 of 2010 by granting police aid in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs for effective implementation of the temporary injunction granted in I.A.No.39 of 2010 in O.S.No.2 of 2010. It is not in dispute that the suit itself is filed for permanent injunction by the respondents/plaintiffs, in which an ex parte injunction was granted in their favour restraining the petitioners/defendants from commencing the prawn culture in ‘B’ schedule property in I.A.No.39 of 2011, in which the petitioners filed their counter seeking dismissal of I.A. Incidentally, the petitioners also filed I.A.No.63 of 2010 in I.A.No.39 of 2011 under Order XXXIX Rules 3 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (for brevity, “CPC”) requesting the Court to vacate the ex parte interim order passed against them, contending that the respondents/plaintiffs have not complied the mandatory provisions under Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC and that they had sent only the documents but not sent the copy of the affidavit filed in support of the I.A. The lower court dismissed the said I.A. holding that no doubt, where non-compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC categorically unfolded, certainly in the light of the proposition, the temporary injunction order needs to be vacated, but the same is not the case herein; that it is always better to dispose of the I.A.No.39 of 2011 on merits, in stead of dismissing the I.A. technically; and that both the parties are agreeable for dismissal of the main injunction petition on the next date of hearing. When an ex parte injunction is granted and the opposite party comes and files a counter and seeks for dismissal of the I.A. or vacating the injunction, it is always incumbent upon the lower court to dispose of the I.A. within 30 days. Without disposing of I.A.No.39 of 2010 on merits, granting of police aid for effective implementation of the orders, does not arise. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the lower court is set aside and the matter is remitted to the lower court to consider the impugned I.A. afresh on disposal of I.A.No.39 of 2010 on merits. The Civil Revision Petition is, accordingly, allowed and the matter is remitted to the lower court for consideration of the impugned I.A. afresh. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J 17.06.2011 Note: - C.C. in three days {B/o} Lmv THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1134 of 2011 Date of Order: 17.06.2011