Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
M.Rajshekar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Seri Srinivas Reddy, S/o Ram Reddy – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the writ petitions filed (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. claims of ownership and procedural objections (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. nature of survey proceedings and jurisdiction (Para 18 , 19 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. court's reasoning on management of boundary disputes (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. conclusion of dismissing the appeals (Para 27) |
JUDGMENT :
Gadi Praveen Kumar, J.
1. Since the issue involved in these matters is common, they are being disposed of by this common judgment
2. Heard Sri J.Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri Muppu Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants in W.A.No.562 of 2025, Sri T.Surya Satish, learned counsel appearing for Sri K.Aravind Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 in W.A.No.562 of 2025/respondent No.5 in W.P.No.33362 of 2025, and Ms.T.Swetcha, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.2 to 6 in W.A.No.562 of 2025/respondent Nos.1 to 4 in W.P.No.33362 of 2025.
3. Writ Appeal No.562 of 2025 is filed by the appellants/third parties being aggrieved by the order dated 29.04.2025 passed in W.P.No.13462 of 2025 by the learned Sin
Survey proceedings under the Telangana Survey and Boundaries Act are administrative and do not adjudicate ownership, thus maintaining the status quo of possession until a legal determination is made.
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
