Disposed

S. Suhasani Paul W/o Late S. Paul v. M. Krishna Reddy S/o M. Yadi Reddy

Telangana HC1 Jun 2016WA/447/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court heard a leave application and writ appeal regarding directions issued to revenue authorities to consider an application for a layout. No substantive order was passed by the lower court on the merits as no action had been taken by the authorities yet.

What did the court decide?

Leave and appeal disposed of; parties advised to raise objections if application is pending or take remedy if sanctioned.

S. Suhasani Paul W/o Late S. Paul Vs M. Krishna Reddy… — Landlord and Tenant | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶4

WAMP.No.2860 OF 2015

¶5

and

¶6

WRIT APPEAL No.447 OF 2016

¶7

DATED: 01.06.2016

¶8

WAMP.No.2860 OF 2015 Between: S. Suhasani Paul … Petitioner and M. Krishna Reddy and others … Respondents

¶9

THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶10

WAMP.No.2860 OF 2015

¶11

WRIT APPEAL No.447 OF 2016

¶12

PC: (per the Hon’ble The Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)

¶13

Petitioner seeks leave to file appeal against the order, dated 12.08.2014 whereby learned Single Judge, while disposing of the Writ Petition filed by respondent Nos.1 to 3 directed the revenue authorities to consider their application for layout in accordance with Rules and pass appropriate orders thereon within six weeks from the date of the order.

¶14

None of the learned counsel for the parties is in a position to state whether any order is passed by the concerned authority in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court.

¶15

By the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, appeal is heard forthwith for admission.

¶16

If the writ petitioners’ application for layout is still pending, it is open to them to raise objections, if they so desire and if any such objections are raised, we hope and trust that the concerned authority shall consider the same in accordance with law. If the application for layout has already been sanctioned as per the directions issued by this Court, it is open to the writ petitioners’ to take appropriate remedy against the same, if they so desire.

¶17

Both the leave application and the appeal are accordingly disposed of.

¶18

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶19

________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ

¶20

1^st JUNE, 2016.

¶21

_________________ P. NAVEEN RAO, J

¶22

kvni

S. Suhasani Paul W/o Late S. Paul v. M. Krishna Reddy S/o M. Yadi Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Suhasani Paul W/o Late S. Paul v. M. Krishna Reddy S/o M. Yadi Reddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Ecologic Chemicals Ltd., Vs Union of India, Rep.by its Secretary

M/s.Nsl Krishnaveni Sugars Ltd., Ramakrishnapur village Vs Union of India., rep.by its Secretary,Ministry of Energy

M/s. Surya Jyothi Spinning Mills Ltd., Vs The Sothern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited

Sri Padmaja Education Society, Rudravaram, Vs The District Educational Officer

S. Adivaiah, S/o. Late Laxmaiah Vs M.Narasimha Reddy

Vignans Institute of Management and Technology for Women, Vs State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary