THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2867 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: Heard both sides. 2. This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order and decree, dated 12.06.2009, passed by the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, allowing the appeal in C.M.A.No.2 of 2009, setting aside the order, dated 22.12.2008, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam in I.A.No.861 of 2008 in O.S.No.169 of 2008. 3. By the impugned order, the lower appellate Court refused to pass an order continuing the order of injunction, which was originally granted by the trial Court, in the said application, and remanded the matter to the trial Court with a direction to dispose of I.A.No.861 of 2008 within two months from the date of receipt of that order. 4. The petitioner is the plaintiff and respondents 1 and 2 are defendants 1 and 2, respectively, in the suit. 5. For the sake of convenience, in this order, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the suit. 6. Learned counsel for the plaintiff strenuously contended that all through there has been temporary injunction granted by the trial Court, at the first instance, in favour of the plaintiff, and that basing on a subsequent development i.e., alleged cancellation of the pattadar passbooks by the Joint Collector, Krishna at Machilipatnam, the lower appellate Court felt it appropriate to remand the matter to the trial Court for consideration of the said interlocutory application afresh on merits. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the second defendant, who is the purchaser from the original owner, contended that the trial Court had, originally, granted temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff basing on the pattadar passbooks. Now, the pattadar passbooks were cancelled and consequently, are not on record and therefore, there is no need to continue the order of temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff, as was originally granted by the trial Court. He further contended that for granting the temporary injunction, it is the pattadar passbooks that were originally found as basis and since the very pattadar passbooks were found to be not on record, as were cancelled by the Joint Collector, the lower appellate Court had rightly did not pass any order continuing the temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff, while remanding the matter to the file of the trial Court. 8. An offer had come from the learned counsel for the second defendant that he would deposit Rs.25,000/- per acre per annum to show the bona fides. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the plaintiff states that it would be too expensive for the plaintiff and that all through the plaintiff had the order of temporary injunction in his favour. Therefore, he submits that there is no justification for the defendants to insist the plaintiff for depositing a sum of Rs.25,000/- per acre per annum. 10. The submissions of both the learned counsel appear to be quite reasonable. But, until and unless this Court is able to arrive at a definite conclusion as regards the validity or otherwise of the cancellation of the pattadar passbooks, which were originally granted in favour of the plaintiff, and also the impugned order passed by the lower appellate Court in not continuing the order of injunction, it is not expedient to pass any order either way as sought for by both the learned counsel. 11. In the above circumstances, I feel it expedient to dispose of the Civil Revision Petition, directing the Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, to dispose of I.A.No.861 of 2008 in O.S.No.169 of 2008, which was originally filed for granting temporary injunction and was ordered at the initial stage, afresh, on merits, basing on the material available on record on or before 15.02.2010. 12. It is further directed that till the said I.A. is disposed of, as directed by this Court, status-quo obtaining as on today shall be maintained by both the parties. 13. Subject to the above observations and directions, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA 05th February 2010 NOTE: Issue C.C. by tomorrow. (B/O) dr