Disposed

M/s. SandS Green Projects Private Limited v. P.Srinivasa Rao

Telangana HC6 Oct 2020CRP/889/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Civil Revision Petition filed against non-disposal of Injunction Application No. 658 of 2018. The High Court observed that since the respondent-GHMC filed a counter in the earlier application, delay in hearing the current vacate application was unjustified, and directed the lower court to decide it within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Court below to take up IA No. 658 of 2018 and IA No. 1619 of 2017 and pass appropriate orders expeditiously within four weeks.

M/s. SandS Green Projects Private Limited Vs… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABA,D

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶5

CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 889 OF 2o2o

¶6

Petition Under Article 227 of lhe Constitution of lndia aggrieved by non-disposal of lA No. 658 of 2018 in l.A. No. 1619 of 2017 in O.S. No. 1585 ot 2017 and consequential l.A. No. 1619 ot 2017 in O.S. No. 1585 of 2017 by granting the default order of Status Quo dated 22-03-2018 in l. A.No.1619 of 2017 in O.S.No.1585 ol 2017 on the file of the Court of the lX Additional Senior Civil Judge , L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶7

Between:

¶8

M/s. S & S Green Prolects Private Limited, a Part lX company incorporated under the companies act^'1956 formerly known as M/s. S & S Constructions, a registered partnership firm, Rep.by its Managing Director, M.Vijaya Sai Aged about 57 years, Occ, Business, having its office at Tl, Green View Plaza, Road No. 1 & 68, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad - 33

¶9

...PETITIONER/ Respondent No. 4 / Defendant No.4

¶10

AND

¶11

P.Srinivasa Rao, S/o.Sri P.Anjaneyulu, Aged 54 years, Occ. Service, Rep. by his GPA Holder, Sri Kesava Rao, S/o.B.Krishna Rao, aged 50 years, Occ. Business, R/o.Plot No.57, Flat No.601, Prathyusha Prestige, Shalivahana Nagar, Hyderabad-S00 073. (GPA registered as ,

¶12

doc No T4l2016 Dt. 02-04-2016). .. Respondent No. , , rtnilitiil"r

¶13

¶14

Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Dy.Commissioner, GHMC, Circle No.1 1 , Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District.

¶16

The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶17

The Sub Registrar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶18

¶19

Pedagoni Komaraiah, S/o.late P.Anthaiah, Aged about 68^years, Occ. t Agriculture,

¶20

Pedagoni Bharatamma, S/o. Sri P.Komaraiah, Aged about 63 years, Occ. Housewife,

¶21

B. Peddagoni Ravi Kumar, S/o.Sri P.Komaraiah, Aged about 48^years, Occ. Agriculture,

¶22

Peddagoni Narendra, S/o.Sri P.Komaraiah, Aged about 43^years, Occ. Agriculture,

¶23

Peddgoni Surendra, S/o. P. Komaraiah, Aged about4l^years, Occ. Agriculture,

¶24

Peddgoni Jairam, S/o.late P.Anjaiah, Aged about 53^years, Occ. Agriculture,

¶25

Paddagoni Lavanya, Wo.Sri P.Jairam, Aged about 45^years, Occ. Agriculturrr

¶26

Peddagoni Komaramma, W/o.late P.Omkaram, Aged ;rtrout 63^years, Occ. House wif :,

¶27

Peddagori Dhanjaya Goud, Aged about 43^years, Oc(;. Business,

¶28

15 Peddagorri Dhananjaya Goud @ Raju, Wo.Omkaram^nged about4l years, Occ. Business,

¶29

-16.^{HariShankar, Slo.Late P.Anthaiah, Aged about53 years,Occ. Agriculture,}

¶30

P.Dhanal:kshmi, S/o.P.Harishankar, Aged about 49 year:;,Occ. House wife,

¶31

18.P.Sathanr.na, Wo.Late P.Anthaiah, Aged about 83 yerars, Occ. Housewife,

¶32

1 9. P.YelamaLah, Wo. P.Anthaiah, Aged about60 years, Ooc. Agriculture,

¶33

P.Prameela, Wo.Sri P.Yelamaiah, Aged about 53^ye;ars, Occ. House wife, (Respondents No.6 to 20are R/o.Khajaguda Village, l3eri ingampally Mandal, Flanga Reddy District).

¶34

21.V.Sudhakar, S/o.late Basaveswar Rao, Aged about 63 yr:ars, Occ. Business;. R/o. Plot No.759, Road No.39, Jubilee Hilk;, Hyderabad.

¶35

...RESt)DI\IDENTS/ Respondents / Defendants l.l.r. 1 to 3 and 5 to 21.

¶36

( Respondent,s No. 2 to 21 are not necessary parties to the present Petition )

¶37

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶38

Petition rnder Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the atfldavit filed in support of the petition, th,:^g nn Court may be pleased to suspend the Order daled 22.03.201 B in Ll'.'\c.1619 of 2017 in 0.S.NO.1585 ct 2017 on the file of the learned lX Ad,iitional Senior Civil Judge, L.B.Na9ar, Ranga Reddy District, pending disposal of the above Civil Revision Petit r:,n.

¶39

Counselfor':he Petitioner: SRI M. V. DURGA PRASAD

¶40

Counsel for the Respondents: None appeared

¶41

The Court n;rde the following: ORDER

¶42

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶43

CRP No.889 of 2020

¶44

ORDER::

¶45

This civil revision petition is filed aggrieved by non-disposal of IA No.658 of 2018 in IA No.1619 of 2Ol7 in OS No.1585 of 2017 and lA No. 16 19 of 2077 in the same suit.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner who is 4th defendant in the suit submits that though the respondent-GHMc has filed its counter in the injunction application IA No. i619 of 2017 as also written statement in the main suit, the Court below has been liberally granting time to the respondent-GHMC for filing counter in the vacate application being IA No.658 of 2O i 8 filed by the petitioner and not taking up the vacate application onl_"- on the ground that counter is not filed therein.

¶47

Thcre is sorne forct' in the submission made bv the lcarned counsel lor the pctitioner. When onc:e the respondent-GHMC has filed counter in rhe injunction application IA No.1619 of 2Ol7 and rr,'ritten statement in the main suit itself, there is no point in expecting it to lile a counter in the vacate application and not taking up the matters for that purpose is not appreciable.

¶48

In the circumstances, suffice it direct the Court below to take up both the IAs referred to above and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance u'ith larv, as expeditiously as possible, not later than lour u,eeks from the date ol receipt of a copy of this order. The civil revision

¶49

¶50

petition is dispc r,t'<1 of accordinglr"^{Miscellaneousaf} l)l^{ciltions ilanv}

¶51

pending in this crrst shall stand closed. No order^{as to c(lsis}

¶52

Srl/- M. MANJ ASSI:;'1"ANT REGI

,TRUE COPY//

s E(:Tt OFFICER

To,

lX Additional Senior Civil Judge , L.B. Nagar, Ranga Re,Jdy District

¶57

The Con rnissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Cor6roration, Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad.

¶58

The Dy.Commissioner, GHMC, Circle No.1 1 , Serilingarnprally, Ranga Reddy District.

¶59

The Dist"ict Registrar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶60

s The Sub Registrar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶61

One CC to SN M. V. DURGA PRASAD, Advocatt: ICPUC] 7. Two CI) C-opies

HIGH^COUFIT

ARR^J

DATED:061'1012020

ORDER

CRP.No.8,E9^{of 2020}

¶68

_".{+,
It 6 sTAI{:
(
:)a
O 0Iocl2120 .Lo
r*
,/ *
c!
.^1 crr

¶69

DISPOSIN'ii^{OF THE CRP.}

¶70

e)
s

M/s. SandS Green Projects Private Limited v. P.Srinivasa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. SandS Green Projects Private Limited v. P.Srinivasa Rao

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 and 2 Others

G. Madhusudhan Yadav and Another Vs Jythuwada Mallaiah and 28 Others

Dr.Nagabhushana Rao Vs Putta Anjaneyulu goud

Sri. Palakurthy Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

P. Bala Mallesh Vs Smt. Sujatha Raji Reddy

Anumula Krishna Vs The State of Telangana