IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2570 of 2009 Petition under Section ____ of CPC., to revise/against the order dated ______ in NO : of 0 on the file of the court of the Between: K.Chitti Babu S/o. Late Kodandaram Chetty R/o. 4-2014 D Block Durga Nagar Colony Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 K.Payanivel Chetty S/o. Late K.Kodandarama Chetty R/o. 3-454 Pagadamanu Street Greamspet Chittoor 2 K.Armugam S/o. Late K.Kodandarama Chetty R/o. 4-45/1, Balajinagar Greamspet, Chittoor 3 K.Eswar Chetty S/o. Late K.Kodandarama Chetty R/o. 3-667, Bazar Street Greamspet, Chittoor 4 K.Krishnamoorthy (mentally retarded under care and custody of the palintiff, S/o. Late K.Kodandarama Chetty R/o. 3-667, Bazar Street Greamspet, Chittoor .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.N.PRAMOD Counsel for the Respondent : MR.T.C.KRISHNAN FOR RVAK-1-TO-4 The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/CRP{VR} THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2570 of 2009 ORDER: Petitioner is the plaintiff. He filed the suit in O.S.609/2005 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittor for declaration and for grant of permanent injunction. Pending disposal of the suit, a temporary injunction was also granted. While so, the defendant filed I.A.422/2007 seeking temporary injunction restraining the plaintiff from alienating the suit schedule property. It is stated in the said I.A. that the petitioner/plaintiff has not filed any counter and as there was no representation, he was set ex parte granting temporary injunction against the petitioner/plaintiff by order dated 24.10.2008. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/plaintiff filed I.A.43/2008 under Or.9 Rule-7 CPC seeking to set aside the ex parte order dated 24.10.2007 passed against him and the same was dismissed by order dated 16.04.2009, against which this Civil Revision Petition is filed. The trial Court dismissed the said application mainly on the ground that the petitioner has not chosen to file counter in I.A.422/2007 and the petition is filed only to drag on the proceedings and to harass the defendant. I am of the opinion that one should not forget that the suit was filed by the plaintiff and in a plaintiff suit filing an application by the defendant seeking injunction against the plaintiff is unwarranted. Therefore, merely because the plaintiff failed to file counter it cannot be said that the Court below is entitled to grant injunction against the plaintiff. Therefore, I am of the opinion that there cannot be any justification in dismissing the application filed seeking to set aside the ex parte order dated 24.07.2007 passed in I.A.422/2007. Having regard to the facts of the case, the order under revision dated 16.04.2009 made in I.A.43/2008 is set aside and I.A.43/2008 filed for setting aside the ex parte order dated 24.07.2009 passed in I.A.422/2008 stands allowed. However, the Court below may take up the main suit itself for expeditious disposal, on priority basis. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 11.09.2009 Dsr