Dismissed

The State of Telangana and 8 Others v. M/s Shantha Sriram Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Telangana HC16 Nov 2021WA/598/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Division Bench disposed of a writ appeal regarding a stay order on property possession. Holding that the pending civil suit and existing status quo rendered an interim injunction unnecessary, the Court stayed the lower court order and dismissed the appeal on liberty.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was disposed of without costs; the order of the Single Judge was stayed without prejudice to her final decision.

The State of Telangana and 8 Others Vs M/s Shantha… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEI\4BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶7

WRIT APPEAL NO: 598 OF 2021

¶8

Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal Preferred Against the Order Dated. 2011012021, passed in WP.No. 25834 ol 2021 on the file of the High Court.

¶9

Between:

¶10

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

¶11

The District Collector, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Secunderabad Division, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Trrumalgherry Mandal, Hyderabad District.

¶14

The Sub Registrar, Bowenpally, Secunderabad.

¶15

The State Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶16

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, North Zone, Hyderabad.

¶17

The Addl. Commissioner of Police, Begumpet, Hyderabad.

¶18

The Station House Officer, Tirumalgherry Police Station, Hyderabad.

¶19

..,APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS

¶20

AND

¶21

It4/s Shantha Sriram Constructions Pvt Ltd., A^private Limited Company incorporated under the^provisions of the lndian Companies^{Act, 1956,} Reprbsented by its Managing Director, Shri^{M Narsaiahson of Sreeramulu,Aged} 51 years, having its registered Office at 501, Oasis^{Centre,Begumpet,} Hyderabad.

¶22

...RESPONDENTMRIT PETITIONER

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 21

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support of^{the petition, the HighCourt may be pleasedto suspend the} impugned order dated 2Ol1Oi2O21^{passed in W.P.No.25834 ol 2021and thereby} dismiss the writ^petition.

¶25

Counsel for the Appellants:^{THE ADVOCATE GENERAL}

¶26

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

¶27

The Court delivered^{the following:}

¶28

¶29

¶30

THE HON'BLE ]]HE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND

¶31

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶32

WRIT APPEAL No.598 of 2O2l

¶33

JUDGMENT: t). iirc t:d bte the Chej.Jusnce Sarrsh Chen.tro Sharmo/

¶34

The present writ appeal is arising out of interim order dated 20,10.2021 passed in W.P.No.25834 of 2O2l by the learned Single Judge.

¶35

The undispr-rted facts of the case reveal that in respect of the propert]' dispute between the State of Telangana and the respondent in the present writ appeal, a writ petition was preferred i.e., W.P.No.5049 of 2016 and the same was disposed of by order dated 08.03.202 1. The undisputecl facts further reveal that while disposing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge has granted stay in favour of M/s. Shantha sriram constructions private Limited directing the state Government not to interlere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner therein unless they obtain a decree lrom the competent civil Court. A liberty was granted to the State of Telangana also to approach the civil Court. The order passed by the learned Single Judge was subjected to judicial scrutinv for filing a writ appeal by the state of relangana and in W.A.No.1SO of 202 1 decided on O2.OZ.2O2I a Division Bench of this Court has stayed the order passed by the learned Single Judge greinting stay order and liberty was granted to the State Government to approach the Civil Court and the trial Court was also granted liberty to pass appropriate orders on the stav

¶36

¶37

¶38

application. The order of the learned Single Judge granting stay was suspended for four weeks. The State of Telangana has preferred a civil suit as per the liberty gra,ted in the matter and an interim order directing the parties to maintain status quo has been passed on 04. 1O.202L. The civil suit is still pending. The matter has to be adjudicated in respect of titre of the parties. The order of status quo is very much in existence. However, again a writ petition i.e', w.P.No.2sg34 of 2e2t has been preferred before the learned single Judge stating that the state is interfering in the peaceful possession of M/s. Shantha Sriram constructions private Limited and the learned Single Judge has granted an interim order on 20.70.2021.

¶39

Learned Government Advocate has argued before this Court that once the order of statzrs quo is granted and the civil suit is pending, there was no occasion for passing any order and M/s. Shantha sriram constructions private Limited was having a liberty to approach the trial Court in case the order of injunction was violated and to file appropriate interlocutory application in the pending civil suit. He has been able to make out a pri.ma facie case to stay the order dated 20. 10.2O2L passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.25834 of 2O2t.

¶40

Resultantly, the order dated 20.lO.2O2l passed in W.P.No.25834 of 2O2l is stayed. At this stage, it has been informed that an application for vacating the stay has already been filed before the learned Single Judge. Therefore, with the consent of the parties, the writ appeal stands disposed of with liberty to the

¶41

¶42

¶43

parties to argue the matter on merits before the learned Single Judge. The parties shall appear before the learned Single Judge on 22.11.2021. Office is directed to list the matter before the ]earned Single Judge oo 22.11.2021 . It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on merits and the learned Single Judge sha1l be free to decide the writ petition in accordance with law, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties.

¶44

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶45

SD/.C.V.MALLIKARJ U NA VARMA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶46

SECTION OFFICER

¶47

To,

¶48

'1. One CC to Sri. Zeeshan Adnan Mahmood, Advocate tOpUCl

¶49

Two ccs to the Advocate Generar, High court for the State of rerangana. (oUT)

¶50

The Hon'ble Registrar lJudicial-l) , High Court of Telangana

¶51

The Section Officer, Writ (Non-service) Section, High Court of Telangana

¶52

Two CD Copies.

¶53

One Spare Copy.

PIV

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611112021

JUDGMENT

WA.No.598 of 2021

1 !.€ Sll It:
/,
rCI?t
d la Nw
N,+'\i D,:spn rc'
- =.===';-

¶61

Disposing of the WA Without costs.

¶62

J
4q
tt lnt4

The State of Telangana and 8 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 8 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Piramal Pharma Limited Vs The State of Telangana

Telangana State Wakf Board Vs Kiran Konijeti and 5 others

Telangana State Wakf Board Vs Shanthi Vasudevan

Kondareddy Vishnumurthy Vs The State of Telangana and 5 Others

The Director (Personnel, Administration and Welfare) Vs Sri. T.Krishna Murthy

Mayur Mundra Vs State of Telangana