Disposed

M/s. Charminar Foods v. The Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited And 3 Others

Telangana HC4 Feb 2020WP/1631/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In these writ petitions concerning property mutation, the petitioners alleged non-mutation hindered building permission. The Court directed petitioners to submit a fresh mutation application within two weeks. The respondents were directed to consider it and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks thereafter.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to submit a fresh mutation application within two weeks. Directed respondents to consider same and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

M/s. Charminar Foods Vs The Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited And 3 Others — Telangana HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION Nos.2234 & 1631 OF 2020

¶2

COOMON ORDER :

¶3

Since the issue raised in these writ petitions is one and the same, both are heard together and disposed of, by way of this common order.

¶4

It has been contended by the petitioners that they have purchased the land from Sri late Vinod Gupta during the year 2006 and the said land was allotted to their vendor i.e Sri late Vinod Gupta by the 2^nd respondent. The grievance of the petitioners is that though the petitioners have purchased the land way back in the year 2006, the respondents are not mutating their names in the revenue records.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that just because the names of the petitioners are not mutated in the revenue records, the 2^nd respondent has entertained and rejected the building permission of the petitioners. Therefore, he contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the 2^nd respondent to initiate process of mutating the names of the petitioners in the revenue records enabling the petitioners to obtain building permission.

¶6

Learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents had contended that if only petitioners submit a fresh application, the 2^nd respondent would consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable period.

¶7

This Court, having considered the rival submissions of both the parties, is of the considered view that these writ petitions can be disposed of directing the petitioners to submit a fresh application to

¶8

¶9

the 2^nd respondent seeking mutation of their names in the revenue records by enclosing all the necessary documents within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and upon receipt of such application, the 2^nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, in another eight (08) weeks thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶10

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed in consequence.

¶11

_________________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI,J

¶12

Date: 04.02.2020
dv

M/s. Charminar Foods v. The Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited And 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Charminar Foods v. The Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited And 3 Others

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

S.Surendra, Vs Union of India

Myadala Bhaskar Goud Vs The State of Telangana, And 7 Others

Pasham Narsimhulu Vs Primary Agriculture Cooperative Society Limited

Hotel Swagath Vs Union of India

Kola Muthyalu Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others

Smt. Boini Suguna Vs The Union of India