HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA C.R.P.Nos. 5166 and 5197 of 2009 DATED: 16.11.2009 Between: Smt.Merugu Anthamma (died as per LRs) and others .. Petitioners And Govu Subanaiah and others .. Respondents COMMON ORDER: As these two civil revision petitions are inter-connected and arise out of the same proceedings, they are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. The petitioners-plaintiffs filed O.S.No.29 of 2008 on the file of the learned Junior Civil Judge, Pargi, Ranga Reddy District seeking declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the plaint schedule property. Along with the suit, they also filed I.A.Nos.100 and 101 of 2008 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC seeking temporary interim injunction restraining defendants and their men from interfering with their possession over the suit schedule property; and seeking temporary interim injunction restraining defendant Nos.3 to 6 from alienating the suit schedule property, respectively. The applications were resisted by the respondents by filing counters. The trial Court, through its separate orders passed on 03.11.2008, dismissed the applications. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed C.M.A.Nos.27 and 28 of 2008 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District. Through its orders, dated 19.06.2009, the appellate Court also dismissed the appeals confirming the order of the trial Court. Hence, the present revision petition. Both the Courts below, on appreciation of the material on record, concurrently held that under registered sale deed, dated 17.03.2009, which was marked as Ex.P15, respondent Nos.1 and 2 have sold the plaint schedule property to respondent Nos.3 to 6 and even delivered possession, and in view of the same, the balance of inconvenience is in favour of the respondents, but not in favour of the petitioners. It was further held that the injury complained of can be compensated in terms of money. Accordingly, both the Courts below dismissed the applications. This Court discerns no infirmity whatsoever in the impugned orders warranting interference of this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The civil revision petitions are accordingly dismissed. No costs. __________________ N.V. RAMANA, J Dt. 16.11.2009 VGB