Disputes over property rights, including encroachment claims, must be adjudicated in Civil Court, especially when construction is under lawful permit.

COMMON ORDER:

1. W.P.No.28362 of 2024 is filed questioning the action of the Respondent Nos.1 and 3 in interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the Petitioner’s property and threatening to demolish the constructions being made by the Petitioner in Door No.6-69 on land admeasuring 626.46 Sq. Yards at Rishikonda, Visakhapatnam even though the constructions are in accordance with the building plan sanctioned vide Permit No.1086/5729/B/Z2/RDA/2022, dated 22.12.2022, as illegal, arbitrary and for consequential reliefs.

2. W.P.No.29930 of 2024 is filed questioning the action of the Respondent No.2 in granting building permission vide Permit No. 1086/5729/B/Z2/RDA/2022, dated 22.12.2022 on misrepresentation regarding title in an extent of Ac.0.15 cents (726 Sq. Yards) in Sy.No.52/20 & Door No.7-59/1 situated in Ommivanipalem of Rishikonda Village, Visakhapatnam Rural Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, as illegal, arbitrary and for consequential reliefs.

3. As both the cases are with reference to the building plan sanctioned in favour of Dr. V. Janaki i.e. the Petitioner in W.P.No.28362 of 2024, a Common Order is being passed.

4. W.P.No.28362 of 2024 is taken as a lead case and the parties are described as mentioned therein.

5. In W.P.No.28362 of 2024, the Petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of the property bearing Door No.6-69 on land admeasuring 626.46 Sq. Yards at Rishikonda, Visakhapatnam. The land extends to an extent of Ac.166.66 Sq. Yards was acquired by the Petitioner pursuant to a registered Sale Deed dated 30.12.2003 bearing document No.4435 of 2003 from Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation (APSFC) pursuant to the public auction. The balance extent of Ac.459.8 Sq. Yards was purchased by the Petitioner vide registered Sale Deed bearing document No.3774 of 2003, dated 12.10.2003 from one Smt. Dunna Uma. The Petitioner claims to be in possession of the said property.

6. On 22.09.2021, the Petitioner entered into a Development Agreement with one Gogineni Naga Pranav vide document bearing No.6219 of 2021, dated 22.09.2021. Pursuant thereto, a building permission was applied and the same was sanctioned vide Permit No.1086/5729/B/Z2/RDA/2022, dated 22.12.2022. As per the building permission, the survey numbers were mentioned as Sy.No.52/16 P & Sy.No.52/20 P and the approved plan was for residential buildings with Ground + 4 Upper Floors.

7. In the Writ Affidavit, the Petitioner pleaded that the property was of an extent of 166.66 Sq. Yards purchased from A.P.S.F.C was assessed to the property tax vide Assessment No.729 and was having Door No.6- 69. The Petitioner further stated that on survey vide Endorsement dated 26.05.2020, the property purchased by the Petitioner from A.P.S.F.C is in Sy.No.52/20 but not in Sy.No.52/21 C. As there was disturbance from the Respondent No.5, the Petitioner had filed a suit O.S.No.452 of 2024 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Bheemunipatnam and an interim injunction order was passed against the Respondent No.5 in I.A.No.142 of 2024 on 26.09.2024 and the same is in vogue.

8. The Petitioner further pleaded that suppressing the pendency of suit, the Respondent No.5 had filed W.P.No.24260 of 2024 before this Court against a third party and this Court vide Order dated 28.10.2024 had disposed of the Writ Petition at admission stage with a direction to the Respondents therein to consider the representation of the Respondent No.5 dated 15.07.2024.

9. It is further pleaded that pursuant to the orders dated 28.10.2024 passed in W.P.No.24260 of 2024, the Respondent No.1 sought to demolish the cons