Partly allowed

Gogu Yadhamma v. The State of Telangana and 7 others

Telangana HC1 Oct 2021WP/24520/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed seeking a direction to the Station House Officer not to interfere in pending civil partition disputes. The petitioner alleged harassment by the SHO to settle the civil matter. The Court partially granted the relief.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Station House Officer not to call the petitioner to the police station or insist on settling disputes with unofficial respondents, pending the partition suit.

Gogu Yadhamma Vs The State of Telangana and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY .THE FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.LAKSHMAN

¶7

wRfT PETITION NO: 24520 OF 2021

¶8

Between:

¶9

Goou Yadhamma. W/o Anianevulu, Aqed^{about 40 years. Occ- HouseWife'} nlo"H Nto.t^-AZ, Dubbaka Village,^{Ramannapet Mandal, Yadadri-BhongiriDistrict.}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Home Department,} Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶13

The Commissioner of^{Police, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate}

¶14

S. f ne Oeputy Commissioner^{of Police, Bhongir, Yadadri-Btrongiri Dlstrict'} 4. The Asit iommissioner of^{Police, Choutuppal' Yadadri-Bhongiri District'} 5. The Station House Officer,^{Police Station Athmakur(tr/), Yadadri-Bhongiri} District.

¶15

Kanneboina Padmamma,^{W/o Ashaiah Aged about 36 years,Occ- Business,} R/o H. No.1-81, near Vemulakonda^{X Road, Lingarajupally Village, Athmakur} t,4andal, Yadadri-Bhongir District.

¶16

Kanneboina Ashaiah, 5/o Sayanna,^{Aged about 40 years, Occ Business,} R/o H. No.1-81, near Vemulakonda^{X Road, Lingarajupally Village' Athmakur} Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District.

¶17

Kanneboina Dhilip, S/o-Ashaiah,^{Agedabout22years, q9.:?S emp.loyee,} Rl/o H. No.1-81, riear Vemulakonda^{X Road, Lingaraiupally Village, Athmakur} Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District.

¶18

...RES'ONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article²²⁶ oI^{the constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith,the High Court may be pleased} to issue a Writ of mandamus^{or any other appropriatewrit order or direction} declaring the action of the^{Respondent No. 5 in interfering into civil disputes and} threatening to handover^{the Petitioners land to an extent of Ac.1-'1ogtsin Sy No.80,} situated at Lingarajupally^{Village, Athmakur(M), Mandal, Yadadri-Bongiri District} and the House bearing^{No.244, situated at LingarajupallyVillage, Athmakur (M),} Mandal, Yadadri-Bongiri District,^{to the RespondentsNo.6 to B and oftenly calling} the Petitioner to the^{Police Station and threateningto settle the civildisputeswith} the Respondent No.6 to^{8, while pending Partitionsuit vide os No. 30/2021 on the} file of the Honble Junior civil^{Judge court at Alair, as illegal,arbitrary. voilative of} Article 14, 15, 19,21 of^{Constitutionof lndia and againstthe principlesof natural} justice and consequently direct Respondent No.^{5 not to interfere into civil disputes} among the Petitioner^{and the Respondent No. 6 to B and also peaceful life and} liberty of the Petitioner.

¶20

IAN O:1 OF 021

¶21

Petition under Section^{151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition,the High court maybe pleased to direct} Respondent No.^{5 not to interfereinto civil disputesin respect of the Petitioners} land to an extent of^{Ac.1 - 1 0gts in Sy No.BO, situatedat Lingarajupally Village'} Athmakur^{(M), Mandal, Yadadri-BongiriDistrict and the House bearing No.244,} situated at Lingarajupally^{Village, Athmakur(M),Mandal, Yadadri-Bongiri District,} while^pending Partition^{suit vide os No.30/2021on the file of the Hon'ble Junior} Civil Judge Court at^Alair.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRI RAPOLUBHASKAR} Counsel forthe Respondent^{Nos.1to 5: GP FOR HOME} Counsel for the^{Respondent Nos.6to 8:---"'--}

¶23

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶24

TIIE IIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{K. LAKSHMAN} \'RIl' Pl'-'IIl'lON No.24520 OIr 2021

¶25

OIIDEII:

¶26

This Writ Petition is filed for the following^relief:

¶27

"...to issue a Writ of mandamus or any^{other appropriate wnt} order or direction declaring the action^{of the Respondent No.5 in} interfering into civil disputes and^{threateningto handoverthe} Petitioner's land to an extent of Ac.l-10^{gts., in Sy No.80situatedat} Lingarajupally Village, Athmakur^{(M) Mandal,Yadadri-Bongiri} District, and the House bearing No.244,^{situatedat Lingarajupally} Vrllage, Athrnakur (M) Mandal, Yadadri-Bongiri^{District, to the} Respondents No.6 to 8 and oftenly^{calling the Petitionerto the} Police Station and threatening^{to settle the civil disputeswith the} Respondents No.6 to 8 while^{pending Partitionsuit vide oS No.} 3012021 on the file of^the Hon'ble^{JuniorCivil Judge Courtat Alair'} as illegal, arbitrary, voilative^{of Article l4 l5 l9 2l of Constitution} of India aud against the^{principlesofnaturaljtrstice atrtl} ctxsequently, dircct^{RespondentNo.5 not to irlteff'ere into civil} clisputes arnong the^{Petitionerand the Respondents No.6 to 8- - ."}

¶28

Heard learned counsel lor^{the petitioner and the learned} Government Pleader^{tbr l{omeappearingfor respondents No. I to 5}

¶29

Learned counsel for^{the petitioner would submit that the} petitioner, respondent No.6 and^{one Gangamma are the daughtersof} one Durgam Narsaiah^{and they are coparcenersof the properties of} Narsaiah. While so, the^{respondentNo.6 hatcheda plan to grab the} subject properties to^{avoid the shares to the petitioner and their} another sister.^{The petitioner requestedthe respondentNo.6several} times to paftition the^{subjectproperties'but she deniedthe same and} got mutated her nanre in^{respectof the subject propertiesin collusion} with the revenue authorities'^{Therefore, the petitionerapproached the} Civil Court and^{filed a partition suit vide O.S.No.30 ol'202 l'While} pending the said suit, the^{respondentNos.6 to 8 approached the} respondent No.5^- Station^{House Officer, Atmakur (M) Police Station,}

¶30

¶31

and at their instance, the respondent No.5 is calling the petitioner to the police station and threatening her to settle the issue with the unoffi cial respondents.

¶32

Leamed Government^pleader for Home, on instructions. would submit that the respondent No.5 has not receivecl any complaint against the petitioner. As on today, there is no crime ltending against the petitioner. Therefore, the respondent No.5 never called the petitioner to the police station and never harassed her as contended by the petitioner in the affidavit. The porice never interf'ered with the civil disputes between the parties. Learned counsel lor the petitioner disputes the same.

¶33

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.5 not to call the petitioner to the police station and not to harass her by insisting her to settle the disputes with the unofficial respondents. However, it is made clear the if the respondent No.5 receives any complaint from the unofflcial respondents or'from any other person, he is at liberty to investigate into the same.

¶34

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand disposed of.. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

¶36

SD/.K.SAILESHI ASSiISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// G SECTION OFFICER

¶37

To, 1 The Prl Secretary, Home Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶38

2.) The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bhongir, Yadadri-Bhongiri Di strict.

¶39

4 The Asst Commissioner of Police, Choutuppal, Yadadri-Bhongiri District. The Station House Officer, Police Station Athmakur^(M), Yadadri-Bhongiri District.

¶40

b One CC to Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, Advocate [OPUC] 7 Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] \ Two CD Copies \yf,:=-

¶41

8I One Spare Copy

HIGH COURT

DATED:01/10/2021

ORDER

WP.No.24520 ot 2021

1 t{ e s TA 15.
(
e
u 2 2 0CT202l f
* *
-.4

¶47

DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

¶48

)ro

Gogu Yadhamma v. The State of Telangana and 7 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gogu Yadhamma v. The State of Telangana and 7 others

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

Sri Chaitanya Builders Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Chaitanya Builders Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Anjani Port land Cement Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

G. Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Bakul Apartments Owners Association Vs The State of Telangana and 8 others

S. Sunanda Vs The State of Telangana and Another