THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH C.C.NO.656 OF 2011 O R D E R Heard both the counsel. 2. Complaining the disobedience of the interim orders of this court in SAMP.No.970/2010 in SAMP.No.2391/2008 in SA.No.1059/2008 dated 21.10.2010, the respondents in the second appeal, who are the original plaintiffs in the suit, filed the present contempt case. 3. The plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.24/2003 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Tamballapalle for declaration of title and permanent injunction and in alternative, for possession of the plaint schedule property, which is an extent of Ac.1-50 cents out of 6-70 cents along with bore-well, situate at Peddathippasamudram Gram Panchayat area, Boorlapalle village, Dry S.No.484-1. 4. By judgment and decree dated 30.11.2006, the trial court decreed the suit and aggrieved by the same, the defendants filed first appeal in A.S.No.15/2007 on the file of II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle. By judgment and decree dated 24.3.2008, the lower appellate court confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial court, excluding the bore well. Challenging the same, the defendants filed the second appeal before this court in S.A.No.1059/2008. By interim order dated 30.9.2008 in SAMP.No.2391/2008 in S.A.No.1059/2008, this court directed to maintain status quo existing as on that date with regard to the possession of the suit schedule property, until further orders. Seeking vacation of the said interim order, the plaintiffs filed vacate petition in SAMP.No.970/2010 in SAMP.No.2391/2008 in S.A.No.1059/2008. By order dated 21.10.2010, this court vacated the interim order of status quo granted on 30.9.2008. Complaining that the respondents/defendants have violated the orders of this court, by re-entering into suit schedule property, the present contempt case is filed. 5. From the material on record, it could be seen that the case of the plaintiffs/petitioners is that pursuant to the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court in A.S.No.15/2007 dated 30.11.2006, they filed E.P.No.54/2008 in O.S.No.24/2003 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Tamballapalle and obtained delivery of the suit schedule property, except the bore well, through the court Ameen on 2.9.2008. Suppressing this fact, the defendants obtained interim orders of status quo from this court in the second appeal and taking advantage of the said order and their absence in the village, they re-entered into the suit schedule land. Further though, this court vacated the interim order of status, they are preventing the plaintiffs from entering into the land and hence they have intentionally violated the interim orders of this court dated 21.10.2010. It is further stated that no boundary dispute was raised by the defendants in the written statement and hence such objection at the stage of execution, cannot entertained. Their further case is that the suit schedule property of an extent of Ac.1-50 cents is covered by Sy.No.484/1 and the remaining Ac.1-85 cents in 484/1 belongs to the respondents. With these averments, the petitioners sought to invoke the provisions under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court’s Act. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/appellants, who also filed counter affidavit vehemently contended that the respondents have not violated the interim orders of this court. He stated that the delivery that is urged by the plaintiffs is only a symbolic possession and not physical possession. He stated that there is any amount of dispute with regard to the identification of the land, as no boundaries are mentioned to the suit land and it is only stated that an extent of Ac.1-50 cents out of Acs.6-70 cents. The defendants are in possession of an extent of Acs.3-35 cents only and the balance of Acs.3-35 cents is within the possession and enjoyment of one Kuppula Obul Reddy of the same village and who was not a party to the suit and that though they have taken the said stand in the written statement, no amendment petition showing the boundaries of the suit land, was filed. With these averments, inter alia and denying the averments made in the contempt case, the same is sought to be dismissed. 7. From the material available on record, it could be seen that as per the case of the petitioners, they have obtained delivery of the suit schedule property through court Amin on 2.9.2008 and that their grievance is that the defendants taking advantage of the status quo order of this court and their absence in the village, has re-entered into the suit schedule property. On the other hand, the defendants while denying the averments of the plaintiffs, contended that they are in possession of an extent of Acs.3-35 cents out of Acs.6-70 cents and that they have not re-entered into the suit land. These disputed questions cannot be gone into by this court in the contempt proceedings and the plaintiffs shall prove with cogent and convincing material that there is clear violation of the interim orders of this court and in the absence of the same, the penal provisions under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, cannot be invoked. This court vacated the interim order of status quo taking into consideration, the fact that the suit schedule property was delivered to the plaintiffs and that the defendants are not in possession of the same. 8. Further, as per the material on record, it could be seen that the plaintiffs filed E.A.No.301/2010 in OEP. No.54/2008 in O.S.No.23/2003, seeking police protection and the same is pending before the trial court. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the contempt case is dismissed and the court below shall dispose of E.A.No.301/2010 in OEP.No.54/2008 in O.S.No.23/2003, on its merits and in accordance with law, based on the material evidence available on record and uninfluenced by any observation made in this order. 10. No order as to costs. AVS ------------------------------------ 18—10—2011