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

2023 Supreme(Telangana) 159

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J.
Kammili Surya Narayana Raju – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
Writ Petition No.6893 of 2023
Decided on : 13-03-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : TEKURU SWETCHA
For the Respondent: GP FOR HOME

Headnote:

Land - Ancestral Property Partition Deed - Possession and enjoyment over lands - Petition is filed seeking to declare action of respondents interfering with possession and enjoyment of petitioner over his lands as illegal and arbitrary - Held, Petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S. on file of Sub Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant Agent to Government and obtained temporary injunction in I.A - Challenging order respondent Nos.5 and 6 filed C.R.P. before this Court - Court, by order granted interim stay of all further proceedings, pursuant to order passed in I.A - As civil disputes are pending between parties and matter is sub judice before this Court, complaint filed by respondent No.6 was closed as 'civil in nature' - Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that petitioner was called to police station for purpose of enquiry in complaint lodged by respondent No.6 - In view of categorical statements made in written instructions and in view of closure of complaint lodged by respondent No.6, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition - Petition closed

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents, particularly respondent No.4, in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over his lands admeasuring Ac.1.20 guntas in Survey No.248, Ac.0.26 guntas in Survey No.249/2 and Acs.2.34 guntas in Survey No.253/A/2, totally admeasuring Acs.5.00, situated in Achyuthapuram Village, Aswaraopeta Mandal, Badradri Kothagudem District, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions received from respondent No.4, submitted that a complaint was received from respondent No.6 stating that the petitioner herein is his maternal uncle; the subject land admeasuring Acs.5.00 was inherited by the mother of respondent No.6 i.e., respondent No.5 herein, from his grandmother and possession of the land was handed over to them through Ancestral Property Partition Deed, dated 15.05.2014, by both the maternal uncles of the respondent No.6, including the petitioner herein, in favour of his father and they also obtained the digital passbook and cultivated the said land for few years; thereafter, they migrated to another village and from thereafter, the petitioner herein is taking care of the said land along with his hand; but, the petitioner herein is not having possession over the land and threatening them with dire consequences and requested to take necessary action as per law. It is further stated that on the complaint lodged by respondent No.6, an entry was made in the General Diary and during enquiry, it is revealed that the petitioner herein filed a civil suit in O.S.No.528 of 2021 on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate and Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam, and obtained temporary injunction in I.A.No.547 of 2021. Challenging the said order, the respondent Nos.5 and 6 filed C.R.P.No.1574 of 2021 before this Court. This Court, by order dated 22.10.2021, granted interim stay of all further proceedings, pursuant to the order passed in I.A.No.547 of 2021, in O.S.No.528 of 2021. As civil disputes are pending between the parties and the matter is sub judice before this Court, the complaint filed by respondent No.6 was closed as ‘civil in nature’. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that the petitioner was called to the police station for the purpose of enquiry in the complaint lodged by respondent No.6.

4. In view of the categorical statements made in the written instructions and in view of the closure of the complaint lodged by respondent No.6, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly closed. If the petitioner has got any grievance at later point of time, he is at liberty to seek modification of the order passed by this Court. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top