Dismissed

P. Palani v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Jul 2024WA/616/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ appeal filed by P. Palani challenging an order that directed her to seek remedies in a Civil Court regarding property possession and a registered sale deed. The Court held that questions of fact regarding ownership and possession cannot be determined in writ proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

P. Palani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

SR AS

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NO: 616 OF 2024

¶8

Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent preferred against the Order dated 04.09.2023 in Writ Petition No. 23081 of 2023 on the file of the High Court. '

¶9

Between:

¶10

P. Palani, D/o. Late Munaswami Reddy Aged about 51 years, Occ ; properties R/o. D.No.7/32, Kattakinda Ramakrishnapuram Village, Puttur Town and Mandal, Tirupati District.

¶11

...Appellant/Petitioner ^

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue, A.P. Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District.

¶14

The Sub-Registrar, Puttur, Tirupati District.

¶15

The Thasildar, Puttur Mandal m Puttur, Tirupati District.

¶16

The Station House Officer, Puttur Police Station, Tirupati District.

¶17

Sri Aarkadu Aarumugam, S/o. Aarkad Govindaswami Reddy, Aged about 24 years, Occ properties, R/o. D.No.7-33, Kattakinda Ramakrishnapuram Village, Puttur Mandal, Tirupati District.

¶18

Sri Aarkadu Kailasam Reddy, S/o. Late A.Vasudeva Reddy, Aged about 60 years, Occ properties, R/o. D.No.7-33, Kattakinda, Ramakrishnapuram Village, Puttur Mandal, Tirupati District..^

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be to direct 2nd Respondent/ Sub- Registrar^{nottoentertain} any further sale transaction in respect of the subject property covered by Sale Deed document No.4202/2021, dated 24.11.2021, pending disposal of the main Writ Appeal.

¶22

Counsel for the Appellant(s): Ms. KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR HOME .

¶25

Counsel for the Respondents 5 & 6 : NONE

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

APHC010222522024

¶28

[3470]

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶30

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶32

PRESENT

¶33

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶35

WRIT APPEAL NO: 616/2024

Between:

P. Palani

...APPELLANT

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶41

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶42

Counsel for the Appellant:

¶43

KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA

¶44

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶45

1.GP FOR HOME

¶46

2.GP FOR REVENUE

¶47

The Court made the following:

¶48

JUDGMENT: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)

¶49

Heard Ms. Kalla Tulasidurgamba, learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material on record.

¶50

Sri P.Palani, the appellant filed the Writ Petition^{No.23081of2023inter-} alia challenging the action of respondent No.3-Tahsildar in issuing the

¶51

possession certificate in favour of respondent No.5 in respect of property in Sy.No.154 to an extent of 188.8 sq.yds situated at Kattakinda, Ramakrishnapuram Village, Ramakrishnapuram (Gollapalli) Post, Puttur Town & Mandal, Tirupati District as also the action of respondent No.4- the Station House Officer in not considering the petitioner’s complaint dated 22.07.2022. The petitioner also prayed for declaration that consequential registered document No.4202/2021, dated 24.11.2021 is null and void and not binding on the petitioner.

¶52

Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition vide order dated 04.09.2023 with the observation that the petitioner may work out her remedies before the competent Civil Court and the observations, if any made by the learned Single Judge in the writ petition shall not come in the way of the competent Court to adjudicate the claim of the petitioner in respect of the subject matter property, on merits.

¶53

With respect to the petitioner’s complaint learned Single Judge observed that the petitioner can work out her remedies under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. The submission advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the petitioner/appellant is the owner and is in possession of the subject property but the possession certificate was issued in favour of respondent No.5.

¶54

The question if the petitioner is the owner and/or in the possession of the property, in view of the controversy as raised in the writ petition is a question of fact which cannot be determined in the exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as it requires proof and evidence to be led. That can be done effectively in the appropriate proceedings, other than writ proceedings.

¶55

We do not find any illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶56

The Writ Appeal is dismissed.

¶57

No order as to costs.

¶58

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

¶59

Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

To,

SECTION OFFICER

One CC to Ms. KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA Advocate [OPUC]

¶64

Two CCS to GP for REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶65

Two CCs to GP for HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶66

Three CD Copies

Madhu

HIGH COURT

DATED:22/07/2024

ORDER

WA.No.616 of 2024

DISMISSING THE WA WITHOUT COSTS

P. Palani v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Palani v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance General Ins Com. Ltd., Nellore Dist Vs v Vijaya Lakshmi, Chittoor Dist and 5 Others

Kum. C. Prathyusha and Another Vs Govindaraju Venkatasesha Sri Kumar and 17 Others

A.John Zerard,Prakasham Dist Vs Union of India,Div.Railway Mg,and 2

Valluri Veeravenkata Satyanarayana Vs Valluri Deepthi and Another

M.Venkataramana Reddy Vs Gajula Satyanarayana

K. Rama Raju, West Godavari District, Vs the Prl.Secretary to Govt. of A.P. Revenue and Another