Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
P. Jaya Kumar vs S. Arumugam on 30 December, 2025
APHC010713882025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3311]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
Tuesday, the Thirtieth day of December
Two Thousand and Five
Present
The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi
Civil Revision Petition No: 3794 of 2025
Between:
P. Jaya Kumar ...Petitioner
and
R Janardhana and others ...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner:
1. P. Madhukar Reddy
Counsel for the respondents:
Nil
The Court made the following:
2
C.R.P.No.3794 of 2025
ORDER:
This civil revision petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India aggrieved for not passing any order in I.A.No.438 of 2025 in I.A.No.241 of 2025 in O.S.No.117 of 2025 on the file of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Anantapuramu, filed by the revision petitioner / plaintiff seeking police aid for enforcement of ad interim injunction order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the same Court.
2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of ad interim injunction in his favour, he is unable to harvest the red gram crop sown by him and the crop is ripe for harvesting and that in spite of the urgency pleaded by the petitioner, the matter has been adjourned by the trial Court to 23.01.2026, by which date, the relief becomes ineffective.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred the decision of the High Court of Madras in S. Kalimuthu Vs. S. Arumugam1, wherein at paragraphs Nos. 15 and 16 it is held as follows:
"15. Before proceeding further with the discussions, it would be useful to refer to the Division Bench Judgment of this Court reported in Sri-la-Sri Sivasubramanya Ananda Swami v. Sri-la- Sri Arunachalasamy Chidambaram and Another, 1993 (1) MLJ 274, wherein the Division Bench had occasion to consider the issue relating to the issue of direction to the police under Section 151 to extend their aid in the execution of the decrees or orders or implementation of orders of injunction passed by Civil Court. Somasundaram, J speaking for the Division Bench, after analysing the entire case law, held thus:
'We must bear in mind that when an order of temporary injunction is granted by the Court under O.39, Rule 1 of the Code 1 1998 (III) CTC 579 3 C.R.P.No.3794 of 2025 or when a decree for permanent injunction is passed by the Civil Court, it involves the following three stages:
The first stage is the issue of an order of temporary injunction or passing of a decree for permanent injunction. When a petition under O.39, Rule 1 of the Code is filed by a party, the court being satisfied that the conditions prescribed under O.39, Rule 1 of the Code are satisfied, may issue an order of temporary injunction in favour of the party, who has applied for the same. Similarly, the court after full trial of a suit and upon the merits of the case, may pass a decree for permanent injunction in favour of a party. There is specific provision in the Code namely O.39 Rule 1 dealing with the grant of the order of temporary injunction. Sec. 38 of the Specific Relief Act deals with the circumstances under which a decree for perpetual injunction can be passed by the courts.
The second stage is the implementation of the order of temporary injunction or decree granting perpetual injunction. There is no specific provision under the Code dealing with the implementation of the order of temporary injunction or a decree for perpetual injunction.
The third stage is the punishment for disobedience of the order of injunction. O.39 Rule 2-A of the Code deals with the consequences of disobedience or breach of injunction or other orders made under O.39, Rule 1 of the Code. 0.21, Rule 32 of the Code says that where a party against whom a decree for injunction has been passed, has had an opportunity of obeying the decree but has wilfully failed to obey it, the decree for injunction may be enforced by his detention in civil prison or by the attachment of his property or by both. Thus the Code contains specific provision with regard to the grant of an order of 4 C.R.P.No.3794 of 2025 temporary injunction and for punishing the party who disobeys the order of temporary injunction and the decree for perpetual injunction. However, there is no provision in the Code providing for the implementation of the order of temporary injunction or decree for perpetual injunction granted by the courts. When there is no specific provision of law which is sufficient to implement the order of temporary injunction or the decree for perpetual injunction granted by the court, we do not see why the provisions of Sec.151 of the Code cannot be invoked for the said purpose to render justice or to redress the wrong, because, the courts should not only have the power to pass an order, but also should have the power to implement the said order. Therefore, when a party has obtained an order of temporary injunction from a court under O.39 Rule 1 of the Code and the other party against whom the order of injunction is passed disobeys the same, the aggrieved party can certainly approach the court invoking the power of the court under Sec. 151 and pray for police aid for the enforcement of the order of temporary injunction. When it is brought to the notice of the court that the enforcement of the order of temporary injunction is sought to be prevented or obstructed, the court in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 151, can direct the police authorities to render all aid to the aggrieved party in the enforcement of the order of the injunction granted by the court in order to render complete justice. It must be remembered, by ordering police help to the party who has obtained an order of temporary injunction, the court merely takes the follow-up steps to implement its earlier order of injunction. In appropriate case, where the court finds that a party who had secured an order of injunction from the court is not in a position to have its full benefit owing either to obstruction or non-co-operation of the other side, it is always open to the 5 C.R.P.No.3794 of 2025 Court to direct the police authorities to see that its order is obeyed. As observed by the Full Bench of this Court in Century Flour Mills Ltd., v. Suppiah, 1975 (2) MLJ 54 when there is a violation of an order of injunction granted by the Civil Court, or when something has been done in dis-obedience of such an order of injunction, it is the duty of the court as a matter of judicial policy to undo the wrong done in disobedience of the court's order and the power to enforce the order of injunction by ordering police aid is available under Sec. 151 of the Code.
In view of the above position of law, it has to be held that in appropriate cases, directions under Sec. 151 of the Civil Procedure Code can be issued by the civil courts to the police authorities to extend their aid and assistance in the execution of decrees and orders or to render aid to aggrieved parties for the due and proper implementation of the order of temporary injunction or a decree for permanent injunction granted by civil courts.'
16. Their Lordships of the Division Bench had ultimately laid down the proposition that when a party has obtained an order of temporary injunction from a Court under Order 39 Rule 1 of the Code and the other party against whom the order of injunction is passed disobeys the same, the aggrieved party can certainly approach the Court invoking the power of the court under Section 151 and pray for police aid for the enforcement of the order of temporary injunction. It has been finally held that the Civil Court has got the powers to enforce the orders of injunction under Section 151 of the Code. The Civil Court can give direction to the police authorities to render assistance or aid for the aggrieved party for due and proper implementation of the order of injunction."
6 C.R.P.No.3794 of 20254. Since the matter is still pending before the trial Court and the trial Court has advantage of hearing both parties, and decision is yet to be taken, at this juncture, this Court is of the view that the relief be decided by the trial Court, however as early as possible without any further delay keeping in view the crop is ripe for harvesting.
5. As such, the civil revision petition is disposed of directing the trial Court to expeditiously dispose of I.A.No.438 of 2025 in I.A.No.241 of 2025 in O.S.No.117 of 2025 on or before 02.01.2026 after hearing both parties.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ B. S. BHANUMATHI, J Dt.30.12.2025 Note: issue C.C. by 31.12.2025 b/o NSM 7 C.R.P.No.3794 of 2025 48 The Honourable Ms. Justice B.S.Bhanumathi Civil Revision Petition No: 3794 of 2025 Dt.30.12.2025 Note: issue C.C. by 31.12.2025 b/o NSM