Dismissed

Kommuru Appala Swamy , Sanjeeva Rao, v. Joint Collector

Telangana HC7 Nov 2012WA/1304/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ appeal challenging the Single Judge's order vacating an interim order granting property documents. The High Court acquitted in the lower court's view as the 1st respondent had given no objection for issuance of pattadar pass book and title deed in favor of the Trust.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal dismissed; appellate order upheld; status-quo maintained pending disposal of writ petition.

Kommuru Appala Swamy , Sanjeeva Rao, Vs Joint Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶2

WRIT APPEAL NO.1304 OF 2012

¶3

Dt: 07-11-2012.

¶4

Between:

¶5

KOMMURU APPALA SWAMY @ SANJEEVA RAO AND OTHERS .. APPELLANTS

¶6

AND

¶7

THE JOINT COLLECTOR VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT VIZIANAGARAM AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS

¶8

HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR

¶9

WRIT APPEAL NO.1304 OF 2012

¶10

JUDGMENT: (Per THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE)

¶11

This writ appeal is filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Hon’ble single Judge on 26.09.2012 in WVMP.No.2508 of 2007 in WPMP.No.16097 of 2007 in W.P.No.12893 of 2007, which was filed by the 4^th respondent in the writ petition, to vacate the interim order dated 25.6.2007 passed in WPMP.No.16097 of 2007.

¶12

Before the Hon’ble single Judge there was no representation for the writ petitioners. Hence, his Lordship after hearing learned counsel appearing for the vacate stay petitioner and perusing the record, vacated the said interim order. The relevant portion of the vacate stay order of the Hon’ble single Judge reads as follows:

¶13

“ Indeed the Joint Collector, Vizianagarm-1^st respondent in the writ petition, referred this aspect in the order impugned in the writ petition. Learned counsel appearing for the vacate stay petitioner high-lighted the relevant portion of the order impugned in the writ petition and it is thus:

¶14

“ Apart from that the 1^st respondent himself gave no objection for issuance of pattadar pass book and title deed in respect of the properties referred to above in favour of Kommuru Appadu Dora Trust represented by its Trustee Sri A.Santhi Gyaneswara Rao before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Bhogapuram as per the Document No.11, dated 20.07.2004.”

¶15

In that view of the matter, the writ petitioners do not deserve for continuance of the interim order, dated 25.06.2007, passed in WPMP.No.16097 of 2007 in W.P.No.12893 of 2007.

¶16

Accordingly, the vacate stay petition is allowed and the interim order, dated 25.06.2007, passed in WPMP.No.16097 of 2007 in W.P.No.12893 of

¶17

2007, shall stand vacated. No costs.”

¶18

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and after perusing the record, we accede with the opinion expressed by the Hon’ble single Judge in the said order in view of the 1^st respondent himself giving no objection for issuance of pattadar pass book and title deed in respect of the properties in question in favour of Kommuru Appadu Dora Trust represented by its Trustee Sri A.Santhi Gyaneswara Rao before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Bhogapuram as per the Document No.11, dated 20.07.2004. Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order so passed by the Hon’ble single Judge.

¶19

We grant liberty to the appellants to approach the Hon’ble single Judge for early disposal of the writ petition. On such request, the Hon’ble single Judge may dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible at his Lordship’s convenience.

¶20

However, status-quo existing as on today shall be maintained by the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents undertakes that they will not alienate the property in question in view of the status-quo order granted by this court.

¶21

This writ appeal is disposed of on the above terms. No costs.

¶22

( PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, ACJ )

¶23

( VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J )

¶24

Dt: 07-11-2012.

¶25

TNB

Kommuru Appala Swamy , Sanjeeva Rao, v. Joint Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kommuru Appala Swamy , Sanjeeva Rao, v. Joint Collector

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

Bantumilli Subba Rao Vs The Mandal Revenue officer,Dwaraka Thirumala

Ketupalli Rambabu Vs The District Collector

G. Sai Reddy, Vs The Principal Secretary

Smt. S. Ratnabai, Vs B. Gopal Reddy

Priyadarsini Dalita Samkshema Sangham, Vs The Govt. of A.P.

Vempati Peda Venkateswarlu Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer