SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(AP) 1367

G.ROHINI, MOTILAL B.NAIK
Syedulla – Appellant
Versus
Special Court, Hyderabad – Respondent


MOTILAL B. NAIK, J.

( 1 ) IN this writ petition, the petitioners seek a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction calling for the records of the first respondent - Special court under A. P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad in I. A. No. 783 of 1997 in LGC No. 261 of 1995 dt. 1-9-1997 and to quash the same as illegal, unsustainable and without jurisdiction and to pass appropriate orders.

( 2 ) THE principal issue which falls for consideration in this writ petition is"whether the Special Court constituted under the A. P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) act or the Tribunals constituted thereunder have jurisdiction to entertain cases and grant injunctive reliefs on the basis of complaints that the other party has been "attempting to grab the land"?

( 3 ) BEFORE we proceed to decide the controversy raised in the writ petition, few facts which are necessary to appreciate the crux of the matter are traced hereunder:

( 4 ) PETITIONERS purchased 6755 square yards of land in Habsiguda in execution of a decree of specific performance in OS No. 54 of 1991 on the file of the Principal Sub-Judge, ranga Reddy District. While so, some persons claming to be the owner















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top