THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3037 OF 2011 Dated: 01.08.2011 Between: Mohd. Abdul Nayeem ..... PETITIONER AND K.Pradeep Kumar .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 3037 OF 2011 O R D E R : The revision petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.33 of 2011 on the file of the Court of the Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XVII M.M.Cyberabad at Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District. The suit is filed for injunction restraining the defendant/respondent herein from interfering with the suit schedule property. The plaintiff also filed I.A.No. 225 of 2011 in O.S.No.33 of 2011 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. for temporary injunction. By order dated 19.4.2011 temporary injunction was initially granted till 29.4.2011. Appearance on behalf of the defendant was entered on 29.4.2011 and while posting the matter for counter on 01.06.2011, temporary injunction was extended till then. On 1.6.2011 a counter was filed on behalf of the respondent, however the petitioner’s counsel was not present. The Court below while recording that though the plaintiff was present, he refused to receive the copies of the orders and documents filed by the defendant/respondent, declined to extend the interim order and posted the I.A. for hearing on 18.06.2011. Aggrieved by the said order dated 01.06.2011, the present revision petition is filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions on merits of the case, vehemently contended that there was absolutely no justifiable reason for not extending the interim order in favour of the petitioner. Having regard to the admitted fact that I.A.No.225 of 2011 is still pending before the Court below, I am of the opinion that the interference by this Court is not warranted and it is not necessary for this Court to express any opinion on merits of the case at this stage. Since a counter has also been filed on behalf of the respondent, it is for the Court below to hear both the parties and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court below to dispose of I.A.No.225 of 2011 following due process of law after hearing both the parties within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 01.08.2011 Note: Issue CC by tomorrow (B/o) Ivd