HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1150 of 2021

ORDER:-

The present Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, aggrieved by the docket order dated 21.10.2021 passed in I.A.No.76 of 2021 in O.S.No.11 of 2021 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda, adjourning the matter to 08.11.2021, beyond the date of auction without deciding the said application on merits as not sustainable.

2. Heard Mr. T.Vishnu Teja, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Arbitration representing the 2nd respondent. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the 1st respondent.

3. The petitioner herein is plaintiff in O.S.No.11 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Avanigadda. He filed a suit against the 1st respondent herein for Specific Performance of agreement of Sale dated 10.05.2020. Seeking grant of interim injunction from alienating the suit schedule property and restraining the 2nd respondent from taking further proceedings in respect of the same, the petitioner on 06.08.2021 filed I.A.No.76 of 2021 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure. The 2nd respondent entered appearance on 25.08.2021 and the matter underwent adjournments for filing counter in the said I.A. Though, the

petitioner expressed urgency in view of the auction notice issued by the 2nd respondent, the learned Trial Court without passing any orders in the I.A., adjourned the matter to 08.11.2021 whereas the auction was scheduled to be held on 01.11.2021. Under the said circumstances, the petitioner filed the instant Revision Petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the petitioner earlier filed W.P.No.14407 of 2021 seeking to declare the action of the official respondents therein in proceeding with auction of the properties, without considering the petitioner's representations dated 05.07.2021 and 12.07.2021 etc., as illegal, arbitrary etc. The said Writ Petition was disposed of by an order dated 23.07.2021 with a direction to the 4th respondent/Tahsildar to dispose of the representations dated 05.07.2021 and 12.07.2021 made by the petitioner, within four (4) weeks from the date of order. He further submits that the 1st respondent executed an agreement of sale on 10.05.2020 in favour of the petitioner pursuant to which, part payment was made by the petitioner and he was put in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. He submits that the petitioner later came to know that the subject matter property was attached by the 2nd respondent on the premise that the 1st respondent has to pay more than Rs.15 lakhs to the Revenue Department. He submits that as the petitioner had parted with substantial amounts

2

towards sale consideration of the suit schedule property and the possession is handed over to him and as the 2nd respondent initiated steps for auction of the suit schedule property, to safeguard his interest of the property, the petitioner on 23.07.2021 instituted the above said suit and moved I.A.No.76 of 2021 seeking interim injunction against the respondents. He submits that the learned Trial Court instead of dealing with the said I.A., adjourned the matter from time to time at the behest of the 2nd respondent. While stating that no counter-affidavit was filed by the 2nd respondent in the said I.A., the learned counsel would further submit that surprisingly the 2nd respondent/Tahsildar filed an I.A., to discharge him from the suit proceedings. He further submits that though there is an urgency to dispose of I.A.No.76 of 2021, as auction of the suit schedule property was scheduled to be conducted on 01.11.2021, despite the said position, the learned Trial Court posted the matter to 08.11.2021 and in the said circumstances, the petitioner filed present Civil Revision Petition and this Court by an order dated 26.10.2021 directed the 2nd respondent not to proceed with the auction proceedings for a period of four weeks. He further submits that if the auction is conducted, pending disposal of I.A.No.76 of 2021, the interest of the petitioner would be seriously affected. The learned counsel also submits that if the Trial Court proceeds with the application filed by the Tahsildar to discharge him from the suit, and decides the same prior to disposal of I.A.No.76 of 2021, he

3

would proceed with the auction, rendering the suit claim infructuous. Under the said circumstances, the learned counsel would urge that the matter be disposed of with a direction to the learned Trial Court to dispose of I.A.No.76 of 2021 before taking up I.A., filed by the 2nd respondent, within a stipulated time and till the disposal of the same, the interim direction granted on 26.10.2021 may be continued.

5. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner has no right or title in respect of the suit schedule property. He submits that the suit schedule property was attached on 12.07.2021 prior to filing of the suit. He denies that the petitioner is in possession of the suit schedule property. The learned Government Pleader also submits that prior to issuance of sale notification, notices were issued to the 1st respondent herein and as he failed to pay the amount, steps to recover the same were taken and ultimately the suit schedule property was brought to auction. He further submits that the 2nd respondent/Tahsildar had rightly issued the auction notice for recovery of the amounts due and the same cannot be said to be illegal or untenable. He also contends that the suit itself is not maintainable and the petitioner is not entitled to any reliefs, much less, the relief sought for in I.A.No.76 of 2021. He submits that there are no merits in the Revision Petition and seeks dismissal of the same.

4

6. This Court has considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel. Though elaborate submissions were made, the only issue which is required to be considered by this Court is as to whether the grievance ventilated regarding non disposal of I.A.No.76 of 2021 is justified and if so, whether directions sought for can be granted?

7. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner and seen from the docket proceedings dated 25.08.2021 onwards, the matter is being adjourned from time to time for appearance of the 1st respondent and for counter of the 2nd respondent. Though this Court finds some justification in the grievance of the petitioner with regard to non-disposal of I.A.No.76 of 2021, the outbreak of COVID-19 and disruption of work, particularly Trial work at the relevant point of time cannot be lost sight of. But, the Trial Court having granted sufficient opportunity to the respondents, ought to have taken up I.A.No.76 of 2021 and decided the same on merits, instead of adjourning the same beyond the date of auction. Though the learned Government Pleader has raised several contentions including the maintainability of the suit, these are the matters which are required to be considered by the learned Trial Court. Further, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, if the application said to have been filed by the 2nd respondent to delete him from the array of parties to the suit is taken up first, I.A.No.76 of 2021 would become infructuous.

8. This Court under the aforementioned circumstances, is of the considered view that it would be appropriate to dispose of the present Civil Revision Petition with a direction to the learned Trial Court to take up I.A.No.76 of 2021 and dispose of the same, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The learned Trial Court is at liberty to consider I.A., stated to have been filed by the 2nd respondent simultaneously along with I.A.No.76 of 2021. Till disposal of I.A.No.76 of 2021, the interim orders granted by this Court on 26.10.2021 shall remain in force. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits or otherwise of the petitioner's claim as set out in I.A.No.76 of 2021 and the learned Trial Court would decide the matter in accordance with Law, uninfluenced by the observations, if any made, in this order.

9. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Civil Revision Petition shall stand closed.

__________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

15.03.2022 BLV

NJS,J CRP No.1150 of 2021

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

Civil Revision Petition No.1150 of 2021 Dated 15.03.2022