Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
M A Razak Hussain, S/o Late Ahmed Ali Siddiqui – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana reptd., by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition seeks to quash an arbitrary order. (Para 1) |
| 2. background on tenancy, ownership, and legal actions. (Para 3) |
| 3. counter argues against petitioner's claims on tenancy. (Para 4) |
| 4. petitioner's arguments on natural justice violations. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 5. unofficial respondents argue legitimacy of succession. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. issues for determination listed. (Para 13) |
| 7. court's analysis of evidence regarding tenancy termination. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 8. legal heirs entitled to succession under the act. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 9. court affirms tahsildar's authority under section 40. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 10. analysis of natural justice claims by petitioner. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 11. court denies writ petition based on procedural adherence. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 12. writ petition dismissed, alternatives remain available. (Para 36 , 37) |
ORDER :
Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, J.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking to quash the order, dated 23.09.2023, in Case No.G/12320/2018, passed by respondent No.3 by declaring the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct respondent No.3 to act in accordance with the directions of this Court in CRP.No.5
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
