Remanded

The State of Telangana and 3 Others v. M/S Shantha Sriram Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Telangana HC2 Jul 2021WA/150/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petition under Section 151 CPC seeking suspension of an order directing land restoration. The Court stayed the order for fifteen days to enable the State to file a civil suit, clarifying that this stay is not an observation on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to file a civil suit; operation of the impugned order stayed for fifteen days.

The State of Telangana and 3 Others Vs M/S Shantha… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT APPEAL NO: 150 OF 2021

¶7

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal Preferred Against the Order Daled 0810312021 passed in WP No 5049 of 2016 on the file of the High Court.

¶8

Between:

¶9

The State of Telangana and 3 Others, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶10

The District Collector, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad

¶11

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad

¶12

The Tahsildar, Thrirnulgherry IVlandal Hyderabad District

¶13

...APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS

¶14

AND

¶15

N,l/S SHANTHA SRIRAM CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD,^rep by its Managing Director, M Narsaiah S/o Sreeramulu, aged about 44^yearc, R/o 501 Oasis Centre, Begumpet, Hyderabad

¶16

...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶17

lA NO:^'f OF 2021

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^petltion, the^{High Court may be pleasedto} suspend the operation ofthe order dl.Bl3l2021^{passedrn W P.No.5049 of2016}

¶19

Counsel for the Appellants: THE ADVOCATE^GENERAL

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent: SRl.^{ZEESHANADNAN MAHMOOD}

¶21

The Court delivered the following:

¶22

¶23

Itenr No.20

¶24

TTIE HON'BLE THE^{CHIEF JUSTICEHIMA KOHLI} AND THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICEB. VIJAYSEN Rf,DDY}

¶25

W.A.No.150 OF 2021

¶26

JUDGMENT:^{(PerrheHon'blerhe Chief Justice Hima Kohli)}

¶27

¶28

This order is in continuation^{of the order passed on2l'06'2021} on which date, Mr.^{HarenderPershad,leamed Special Govemment} Pleader had sought time^{to obtain instructions from the Department as} to rr helher the State^{proposes to itrstitute a civil sr'ritin respect ol the} subject land.^{'l'oday, he submits that he has instructionsto state that} the present appeal may^{be disposedof with libertyto the appellants/} State to approach the Civil^{Courtand file a civil suit fbr claiming title} and possession of the subject^land.

¶29

Learned counsel for the^{appellantshowever requests that} operation of the^{impugned orderpassedby the learned SingleJudge} directing the appellants^{to restore the subject land, may be stayed till} the appellants take^{stepsto approach the trial court by filing a suit' He} clarifies that the subject^{land is presentlya vacant parcelof land,} which is under the control^{of the Tahsildar.}

¶30

In view of the submission^{madehereinabove, leave as prayed} ibr, is granted.^{-I'he present appealis disposed of along with the} pending applications, if any.^{The operationof the impugnedorder} shall rc'main staye cl lbr^{a period of tburrve eksreckonedllonr today to} enable the appellallts to^{seek appropriatelegal I'ecoursc' ltis}

Page I of 2

W.A.No.l50 of 2021

--\

however made clear that the aforesaid protection granted to the appellants shall not be construed as an observation on the merits of the suit that the appellants propose to institute. The leamed trial court shall be at libefty to pass appropriate orders on the stay application that may be filed by the appellants along with plaint, uninfluenced by the order passed above.

¶35

<br>

¶36

SD/. CH.VENKATESWARULU DEPUTY REGISTRAR

,TRUE COPY'

SECTION OFFICER

To,

'1 . One CC to Sri. Zeeshan Adnan l,4ahmood, Advocate IOPUC] 2, Two CCs to the^{Advocate General,Highcourt for the state of Telangana.(oUT)} 3. Two CD Copies.

¶41

One spare copy \ PM \ *-' NS

¶42

HIGH COURT

¶43

DAIED:0210712021

¶44

H ra rA'
0 e JuLzon F
ci: t,r'c ,.

JUDGMENT

WA.No.150 oI 2021

Disposing of the^WA.

1,,<br>@
c<br>

The State of Telangana and 3 Others v. M/S Shantha Sriram Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Telangana and 3 Others v. M/S Shantha Sriram Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Shravanthi Vs D.Dharma Prakash

N. Suman Kalyanji Vs The High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad and another

Bakulesh Trambaklal Shah Vs Videocon Realty and Infrastructure Limited and 12 Others

P.Venkat Reddy Vs High Court of Judicature at Hyd, and 2 Others

Gopala Ramudu Vs City Civil Court, Hyderabad

M/s.Murad Fuel Station Vs The Station House Officer and 2 others