Smt. Karam Jilakaramma, v. State of Telangana.
Case brief
What is this about?
This Writ Petition challenged the interference of the 4th respondent in a civil land dispute with the 5th respondent. The Court disposed of the petition without considering merits, directing the 4th respondent to confine to criminal law limits and not interfere with pending civil disputes or summon the petitioner arbitrarily.
What did the court decide?
Directing the 4th respondent authorities to confine to criminal law limits, not interfere with the pending civil dispute and not summon the petitioner except in accordance with law.
What the court decided
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.20216 OF 2016
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home. With consent of the counsel appearing for both sides, the present writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.
2. Since this Court is not going into the merits of the case, it may not be necessary to issue notice to the unofficial respondent.
3. The present writ petition came to be filed seeking issuance of the writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in interfering with the civil disputes in respect of the land in Acs.429 Gts., in Sy.No.144/10 situated at Pinapakapatti Nagar, Burghampahad Mandal, Khammam District, and forcing the petitioner to compromise the matter with the 5th respondent as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with the said civil dispute in any manner in respect of the said land.
4. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the 4th respondent is illegally and intentionally calling the petitioner to the police station everyday to settle the civil dispute pending between him and the 5th respondent.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Judicial Magistrate should be directed not to interfere with pending civil disputes or summon the petitioner regarding land issues?
Whether the action of the 4th respondent in summoning the petitioner to settle a civil dispute is illegal?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Respondent 1
- respondent
Respondent 2
- respondent
Respondent 3
- respondent
Respondent 4
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · June
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/20216/2016
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court