- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The appellant who is a member of superior judicial service of the State of Andhra Pradesh has preferred this appeal for expunging the remarks made by the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court in paragraphs 10 and 11 of order dated 25.6.2009 passed in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 420 of 2009 and the direction contained in paragraph 13 thereof.
(3.) Pochamreddy Subba Reddy and three others (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiffs') filed O.S. No. 1 of 2009 for grant of permanent injunction to restrain Maddika Nageshwari and six others (hereinafter referred as 'the defendants') from interfering with the plaint schedule properties. They also filed I.A. No. 34 of 2009 for grant of temporary injunction. The defendants contested the prayer for temporary injunction by asserting that the plaintiffs do not have any right over the suit property and that in the suits filed by them temporary injunction has already been granted by the trial Court restraining the plaintiffs from interfering with their possession. By an order dated 12.3.2009, the appellant, who was then holding the post of Principal District Judge, Kadapa, granted temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs and restrained the defendants from interfering with the plaint schedule property. Simultaneously, he injuncted the plaintiffs from intermeddling with the suit property. While passing the order of injunction, the appellant did take cognizance of the fact that the defendants had filed O.S. Nos. 336 of 2008 and 781 of 2008 against the plaintiffs and the concerned courts had passed order of injunction in their favour and that this fact was against the plaintiffs, but still he directed the parties to maintain status quo.;