IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.M.A.No.772 OF 2011 Date:06.09.2011 Between:- Dalli Krishna Veni and another ..Appellants And N.Udya Bhasini .. Respondent JUDGMENT:- The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘C.P.C.’) is directed against the order, dated 09.03.2011, in I.A.No.78 of 2011 (new) in I.A.No.258 of 2008 (old) in O.S.No.389 of 2008 on the file of VI Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, whereunder and whereby, the petition under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. for interim injunction was allowed. 2. Respondent herein/plaintiff filed O.S.No.389 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam against the appellants herein/defendants for a direction to the defendants to execute a regular registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in terms of the sale agreement, dated 06.07.2003. Pending disposal of the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.78 of 2011 (new) in I.A.No.258 of 2008 (old) in O.S.No.389 of 2008 for ad-interim injunction against the defendants restraining them from alienating the suit schedule property and the same was allowed vide the impugned order. 3. The grievance of the appellants/defendants is that some observations in order made in I.A.No.78 of 2011 in respect of Exs.A-2 and A-6 would come in his way during trial of the suit. 4. There cannot be any dispute that any observations or findings given in the interlocutory application are to be confined only to the extent of disposal of that interlocutory application. No doubt, Ex.A-2- acknowledgment, dated 20.03.2008, and Ex.A-6, photo copy of the settlement paper, dated 28.02.1988, were not filed along with the plaint but they were marked. Mere marking of the documents in the interlocutory application does not mean that the documents have been admitted in evidence in the suit so as to place reliance on them. Therefore, the documents filed by the plaintiff in the interlocutory application are only for the purpose of disposal of that interlocutory application. That does not mean that they are admitted in evidence. The defendants can raise an objection with regard to the admissibility and relevancy of those documents at appropriate time during the trial. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. It is made clear that any observation made in the impugned order shall have no effect or bearing in the final disposal of the suit. Uninfluenced by any observation or finding given in the impugned order, the trial Court shall dispose of the suit preferably within a period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in accordance with law. 5. With the above direction, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _​_____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 06th September, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.M.A.No.772 OF 2011 Date:06.09.2011 AMD