The High Court · 2025

...Petitioners/Defendants/Respondents AND 1 2 Yellavula Seethamma, Wo.Seetharamulu, Aged 70 years, Occ. Agriculture - Rio Hemachand rapuram vi ilage, Karukon,ia 6. F Liiiiioevipaitr u%nolir' Yallavula seetharamuru. S/o Late lvruthaiah, Aged 77 years, occ Agricurture R/o Hemachandrapuram viltage, rirulJnij 6]ilL"'r,i,lo"vipali Mandat ... Defenda nts/Petitioners/plai ntiffs IANO:1OF2 025 Petition under Section '151 of cpc praying that in the .rircumstances stated in the affidavit.fired in support of the petiiion, thl Hign coLrrl may oe pteasJ'to stay the.oqgr?lgl of impugned order in tA No 149 oiZOZS rn OS No. Z'siiilOzz dated 31 07 2025 on the fire of Agent to Government Br-aJradri xoGguJ"r, Dist,ct at Bhadradrr Kothagudem, pending disposar of thr: main civir R"evision Petition, in the interest of justice. IANO:2OF2 025 Between: 1 2 Yellavula Seethamma. Wo,seetharamulu, Aged 70 yea.s Occ Agriculture R/o Hemachand rapuram village. Karuko",ii 6.F Lrirrle.vrpaili Mandal Yallavula Seetharamulu, S/o Late Muthaiah, Aged 7l yetrs, Occ. Agrrculture R/o Hemachandrapuram viilage, Kar,konti d]p-,-l-r,i.,'i,tuuiprrrinli"noii'"'- ...Petitic,ners/Respondents AND 1 4 1 YellavulllVohan Rao. S/o. Late Ramaiah. aged 52 yelrs, Occ. Aqriculture. vitlage R/o Hemachandraprra, crampi;;h';y;ih' r:;iliriri"l# i,)Iiiiri, Karukonda Yllavula Jaqan Mohan Rao, S/o. Late_ Ramaiah, agred 4g years, Occ. Ag ricu ttu re, R/o Hemachandra puram uittrgi iii];i.oniii - o rJri,inciaFit, Kothagudem ItIandal. Yellavula Venkata Lakshmi,, W/o. Late Rajgmallu age 55 years, Occ. House wife, R/o.H No 6-63, Hemachandraprram,lilflge,liiirioevrpatti mandat. Yellavula Venkata prasad. S/o. Late Rajamallu, aoe 35 years. occ. Circle lnspector. Crime Branch at Khammam nio.i. r.rb o:o"s id;;.lr;;;rp;;r"; village, Laxmidevipalli mandal . '-- - -' . 5 Puligilli Kavitha, W/o. Naresh, Hanumanthula Gadda, Gollamali District Palako lu vi lage, J u turupao u Nltanoai "ehroir,iriRJin"gl. a.Sq . 32.. years, Occ House wife, R/o. arah Veedhi, Korivi Mar dal. Mahaboobabad 6 Rayashetti Uma, Wo. praveen, age 30 years, Occ House wife. R/o. 7 Yellavula Madhavr Wo. Late yelleswar Rao, aqe 45 yea-s. Occ. House wife, R/o H No 6-53/2 Hemachandrapr;r; ritr;g;:- iar<!nr- ievrpitiy- rii;;;t, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. ' B Yellavula t\rlurali. S/o.Late yelleswar Rao, age 25 y.:;rrs. Occ Studenf. R/o-H.No.6-53/2 Hemachandrapuram Lakshmi"devipaili :r; d--"8"'""'".' Kothagudem District. ". 6rtri"il' ' -:,-' ...petitio ners/Respondents ----'--7 Petition under Section 151 of CPC praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 22-08-202 5 passed in lA No 1 of 2025 in CRp No 2904 of 2025 Counsel for the Petitioners: SRt YABBEZ REPRESENTING SRI P RAMA SHARANA SHARMA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI PALLY VINOD KUMAR REDOY The Court made the following: ORDER THE IION'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENII/,\S RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2904 ()I. 2025 ORDER This civil revision petition has been filed aggrirl, ed by the order passed by the learned Agent to Govemment (Distric, Collector), at Bhadradri Korhagudem ('trial Court, for brevity) wherein I.A.No. 149 of 2025 in (f.S.No.2>2 of 2022 dated 31.07.20,.t-: wherein the application filcd by respondent Nos. I and 2lplainti.ll; was allowed directing the petitioners/det'endants to deposit tht sare amounts through a demand drafi in fbvour ol Agent to Govemrr.Lent.

2. Heard Sri Yabbez, leamed counsel, representing Sri p.Rama Sharana Shanra. leamed counsel fbr the petitioners, iLnd Sri p.Vinod Kumar Reddy, learned counsel lor respondents/plaintilts.

3. For the sake olconvenience, the parlies are herei.after referred to as per their nornenclature in the trial Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants s,bmits that the respondents/plartiffs have tlled suit vide o.S.No.2 52 ctl- 2022 on the file of the Agenr to Go',,ernmenr (District Collector r at Bhadradri Kothagudem District, seeking perpetual injunction rc;training the 2 JSR, J C.R.P.No.2904 oF 2025 defendants from interfering with the physical possession of the suit schedule property and to cancel the pattadar passbook issued in the names of the late Yellavula Rajamallu and yellavula yelleswar Rao, and also against defendant Nos.l and 2 for item Nos. I to 3 of the suit schedule properties. Along with the su it, the plaintiffs filed an application vide I.A.No. 198 of 2022 for grant of temporary injunction, which was dismissed on 15.02.2025. Thereafter, plaintiffs Nos. I and 2 flled an application vide I.A.No.l49 of 2025, invoking the provisions under Section t5l of the CPC read with Rute a3(C) of the Agency Rules, seeking to punish the defendants on the ground that they intentionally entered into the suit schedule property and cut the eucalyptus plants. The Court below, without properly appreciating the contentions raised by the defendants, passed the impugned order on

31.07.2025, directing the defendants to .deposit the sale amount through a demand draft in favour of the Agent to Govemment immediately.

5. Leame d counsel for the defendants further submitted that the delendants are in possession of the suit schedule property and had raised the eucalyptus plants and the injunction application filed by the J JSR, J C R-P No.2904 OF 2025 plaintiffs was dismissed on r 5.02.2025. Hence, the irnpuened order passed by thc trial courr is contrary to the earr ier order dated

31.07.2025. He further submitted that in the absence c,f any order in favour of the plaintiff's, the plaintilfs are not entitled t. seek to p,nish the defendants especially the defendants have not violatt:d any judicial order passed by the Court below. Hence the impugnt:c order passed by the trial Court is liablc to be set aside.

6. Per contra, Sri P.Vinod Kumar Reddv, leat.ned counsel appearing on behalf of plaintifl.s subrnirs rhar plaintifr; have been in possession and enjoyment ol the suit schedure propert\. c,n the date of institution of the suit and they have raised Eucalyptr s crops. The defendants without having any rnanner of right taken a,,vay the said crop and the learncd trial court has rightly directed the c efendants to deposit the a*ormt in respect or the said Eucaryptus plrr.ts and there are no grounds to interf-ere w ith the impugned order passerl by the trial Court and the revision petition is liable to be dismissed.

7. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on rec rr.d it reveals that the plaintilfs have fircd suit in o.S.No.252 of -022 seeking 4 JSR, J C R.P No.2904 OF 2025 perpetual injunction and cancellation of the pattadar passbooks in respect of suit schedule property, along with the said suit the plaintiffs fited apptication l.A.No. 198 of 2022 for grant of ad interim injunction invoking the provisions of Order XXKX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 15t of Code ol Civit Procedure ('CPC' for brevity). The record disclose that the trial Court after hearing both the parties dismissed the application on 15.02.2025. The plaintiffs have not filed any appeal or revision aggrieved by the above said order. On the other hand, thc plaintills filed I.A.No. 149 of 2025 invoking the provisions of Section l5l ol CPC read with Section a3(C) of Telangana Agency Rules, 1924 to punish the defendants and direct them to deposit the sale amount belore the Court.

8. Admittedly, the learned trail Court has not granted any interim order in their lavour and the delendants have not violated any judicial order passed by the leamed trial Court. The onty ground raised by the ptaintiffs before the trial Court is that they are in possession of the suit schedule property and they have raised the standing crop and the defendants have taken away the said crop and they are liable for punishment ) JSR, J r I F P.No 2r0.+ OF 2025 g. It is settled law that, the parties are not entitled to seek to punish the other partv in the absencc of any jtrdicial order'. Whether the plaintiffs are in possession oi the suit schedule l)roperty or the defendants are in possession of the suit schedule proptny and whether the plaintiffs have raised Eucalyptus crop or not, the srrid aspects have to be adjudicated after full fledged trial, basing on the evidence which is going to be adduced by either of thc parties and thar stage has not been reached. It is atready stated supra that ad intt-im injunction application filed by the plaintitls w'as dismissed by tl-e trial (lourt on

15.02.2025. In such circumstances, the impugned ord:r passed by the leamed trial Court dated 31.01 .2025 directing the defendants to deposit the am()unts is contrary to the order dated I5.01 2025.

10. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that irnpugned order dated 31.07.2025 passed by the leamed trial Court is liable to be set I I aside. Accordingly set aside. Horvever, the plaintrf 1s are granted libefty to agitate their rights belore the trial Court b" raising all the grounds which are available under law by producirg thc evidence establishing their claim. The nature of the suit filed b, the plaintiff is simple suit for perpetual injunction which is pending sincc 2022 and 6 \EJSR. J C.R P No 29O+ Of 2O25 to render substantial justice to the parties, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the main suit as expeditiously as possible preferable within a period of six (6) months. The partics are directed to cooperate with the trial Court lor disposal of the case without taking undue adjournments. I 1. Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition is allowed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, il any, pending in this civil revision petition shall stand closed. SD/.L VIJAYA LAXMI ISTANT REGISTRAR A //TRUE COPY// ECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Agent to Government Bhadradri Kothagudem District at Bhadradri Kothagudem.

2. One CC to Sri P Rama Sharana Sharma, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri Pally Vinod Kumar Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CD Copies ABK HIGH COURT DATED: 3111012025 -iirl Y - i"i.\"'\-. .t I il0tI 20?5 ,i: ,,., -) /,/ -., ir i/ t,t.'\ta ._-a'..' '! .: .:_. r.' ORDER CRP.No.2904 of 2025 t_t j(J ,.4.. ,,. ': - ',..{.i: I \ t \ ALLOWING THE CRP WITHOUT COSTS I U) J ..,(