Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 13913
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI, J
C. SRINRYASA MURTHY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
Writ Petition No: 4958/2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD
For the Respondents: GP FOR HOME (AP)
Court declines to intervene in civil disputes, emphasizing lack of representation leads to dismissal.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14, Article 21, Article 300(A) - Writ of Mandamus - Petitioner sought protection regarding a property dispute and challenged the inaction of police in taking action on complaints made - Court noted that the matter was of civil nature and decided not to intervene in civil disputes.(Paras 1, 3)
(B) Writ Petition- The petition was dismissed as infructuous due to the absence of representation for the petitioner, leading to a decision reflecting the principle that the courts should not entertain matters lacking proper presentation.(Paras 2, 4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought police protection for a property dispute and claimed the government's inaction as arbitrary and unconstitutional. Findings of the Court: The contention presented was deemed outside the court's jurisdiction as it was a civil matter.
Issues: The primary issue revolved around the alleged inaction of the police and the petitioner's request for intervention in a civil dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated its stance on not intervening in civil matters unless justified by compelling circumstances.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. no representation leads to dismissal of case. (Para 2) |
| 2. court refrains from interceding in civil issues. (Para 3) |
| 3. writ petition dismissed due to civil nature. (Para 4) |
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:
“….to issue a writ or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the in action of respondents 2 to 4 in not considering the complaints and not extending the protection to the schedule property bearing Door No - 20-3-130 - 1st floor Sivajyothi Nagar, TTD bye pass road area , Triupathi town Muncipall limits, ward no 20 , Tirupathi , Chittoor District and not registering the complaint and not providing police protection for implementing the temporary injunction order grated in I.A. No 626/3018 in O.S No.296/2018 On the file of the court of the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Tirupathi and to declare the impunged inaction of respondents as illegal, arbitrary unconstitutional being violative of Article 14 , 21 and 300 (A) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to provide police protection for implementing the temporary injuction order grated in I.A. No 626/3018 in O.S No.296/2018 On the file of the court of the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Tirupathi and pass…”
2. None appeared for the petitioner, though the matter is posted under the caption “for dismissal”. There was no representation for the petitioners today as well as on the previous adjournment.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home already submitted that the enquiry of the police would reveal that it is a matter of civil in nature, and therefore, they are never interfere in civil disputes.
4. Recording the submission made by learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
There shall be no order as to costs.
