Disposed

Deccan Infra v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Sept 2019WP/15401/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order is a short disposal of a writ petition filed by petitioners against certain respondents for alleged interference in civil disputes over property possession. The court noted that the respondent filed a counter affidavit denying such interference and relied on this admission to dispose of the petition without detailed analysis.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Deccan Infra Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITON No.15401 of 2019

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This Writ Petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3^rd respondent in interfering with the civil disputes with regard to possession and enjoyment of the petitioners in respect of schedule property admeasuring Acs.28.22 gts in Sy.No.711,712,715, 736 situated at Narayanagiri Village, Pochampally Mandal, Yadadri Bhongiri District and contrary to Interim injunction order granted in I.A.No.650 of 2018 in O.S.No.145 of 2018 by the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Bhongiri, as illegal and arbitrary and for consequential directions.

¶4

Counter affidavit is filed by the respondent No.3 stating that they are not interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioners and respondents 4 to 15 and that two criminal cases i.e., Cr.No.120/2018 and 144/2018 have been registered and that charge sheets have also been filed.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri V.M.Krishna Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 4, 9, 10 & 12.

¶6

Learned counsel for respondents 4, 9, 10 & 12 submits that originally the predecessors of the vendors of the writ petitioners purchased the property prior in point of time and the purchase by the writ petitioners is subsequently.

¶7

In this case, it is to be seen that the writ petition is filed only against respondents 1 to 3 alleging interference in civil

¶8

disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents. The respondent No.3 filed counter stating that they are not interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents.

¶9

Recording the averments in the counter affidavit filed by the 3^rd respondent, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶10

_________________________
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
18-09-2019
kvs

¶11

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶12

WRIT PETITON No.15401 of 2019

¶13

Date 18.09.2019. kvs

Deccan Infra v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deccan Infra v. The State of Telangana

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

M/s. Omega Elevators Vs Union of India

M/s. Omega Elevators Vs Union of India

Reynolds High School (English Medium) Vs State of Telangana

Jadhav Govind Vs The State of Telangana and 10 Others

Sheri Vishnuvardhan Reddy, Vs The Secretary

S. Sunny Yadav Vs TThe State of Telangana And 6 Others