Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Lanka Prasad vs Boorla Giridhar Venkateswara Gupta on 2 January, 2026
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010464422025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3206]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2578/2025
Between:
1. LANKA PRASAD,, S/O. KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O.
D.NO. 6-129/1 ADDEPALLI VILLAGE, BHATTIPROLU MANDAL
BAPATIA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1. BOORLA GIRIDHAR VENKATESWARA GUPTA, S/O. VENKATA
NAGA RAMAMOHANARAO AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.
10-5, BHATTUPROLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL BAPATIA DISTRICT.
2. NAMBURI PRAVEENA, , W/O. VAMSI KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 39
YEARS, R/O. PLOT NO. 151, SWAROOR NAGAR, SAGAR ROAD
FLASTINAPUR CENTRAL, HYDERABAD, TELANAGANA
3. MADDULA ANUSHA, W/O. MRUDUMALLA SUMAN AGED ABOUT 36
YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 21-34, BHATTUPROLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL
BAPATIA DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed herein,the High Court may be pleased topleased set aside the Order dated 29.07.2025 passed in I.A.NO. 249 OF 2025 in A.T.C.NO. 01/2025 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) Repalle and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 2 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2578 of 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased stay of all further proceedings in A.T.C.NO. 01/2025 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Repalle pending disposal of the present petition Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. PILLIX LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. SIVA SANKARA RAO BORRA
2. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI 3 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2578 of 2025 The Court made the following Order:
The petitioner herein had filed A.T.C.No.1 of 2025 before the learned Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Repalle-cum- Tenancy Special Officer, Repalle, against respondents 1 to 3 herein seeking an injunction restraining the respondents from evicting him from the property in relation to five separate pieces of land, aggregating to Ac.4.27cents of land in various Survey numbers of Addepalli Village, Bhattiprolu Gram Panchayat, Bapatla District. The case of the petitioner in the said Agricultural Tenancy Case was that the 1st respondent had initially inducted the petitioner as a tenant and that the petitioner had continued as a tenant even after the respondents 2 & 3 had purchased the property from the 1st respondent.
2. The petitioner had also filed I.A.No.249 of 2025, in A.T.C.No.1 of 2025, seeking a temporary injunction, pending disposal of the Agricultural Tenancy Case. The Tenancy Special Officer, by order dated 29.07.2025, had rejected the said application on the ground that the petitioner could not demonstrate possession over the said property.
3. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
4. This Court, by an order, dated 07.11.2025, had stayed dispossession of the petitioner. This order came to be passed on the basis of the contents of the FIR filed by the 1st respondent, before the Bhattiprolu 4 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2578 of 2025 Police Station on 07.08.2025 and it was registered as Crime No.110 of 2025.
In this FIR, the 1st respondent had stated that the petitioner herein was cultivating the said land for the past four years without paying rent and had threatened the 1st respondent when he had sought payment of rent.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent would contend that the petitioner was initially inducted as a tenant. However, the fact that the petitioner had vacated the said land had not been placed appropriately in the complaint and the petitioner is seeking advantage of this mistake in the said complaint.
6. Apart from the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent would also contend that the remedy against the impugned order, dated 29.07.2025, is to file an appeal under Section 16 (2) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956.
7. Since there is an alternative remedy of appeal before the District Judge, under Section 16 (2) of the Act, it would only be appropriate that the petitioner is relegated to the alternative remedy of filing such an appeal.
8. In such circumstances, it would not be appropriate for this Court to go into the question of possession, at this stage. Any observation of this Court, in this regard, would prejudice the case of both sides.
9. However, since this Court had earlier granted an order of stay of dispossession, it would be appropriate to direct that status quo, as on today, 5 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2578 of 2025 shall be maintained till the filing of an appeal, subject to further condition that such an appeal will be filed within one (01) week from today. Any such appeal filed within one (01) week from today shall be taken on record and considered, without reference to the question of limitation.
10. Needless to say, none of the observations of this Court, either in the Interlocutory Order or the observations of this Court in this order, shall be taken into account by the Appellate Authority as and when the Appeal is filed.
11. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J 02.01.2026 MJA 6 RRR, J C.R.P.No.2578 of 2025 79 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 2578/2025 02.01.2026 MJA