Dismissed

Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhar Rao v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Jun 2023WP/11072/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed two writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by petitioners seeking police aid to enforce interim injunction orders in a property dispute. The Court held that since an alternative remedy existed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the CPC, and the matter involved a private dispute without public injury, the writ petitions were not maintainable.

What the court decided

AI extract

Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhar Rao Vs The State… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAAAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C,V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 11072 OF 2023 AND 11073 0F 2023

¶7

W.P.NO: '11072 OF 2023

¶8

Between

¶9

Prof. R.V.R. CHANDRASEKHAR RAO, S/o R Venkata Ramana Murthy Aged about 87 years, Occ . Retd. Prof. lep.by^{his GPA Holder RavikantiSatya VenkataRamana MurthyS/o R.V R} Chandra-s^ekhar Rao,. aged about 59 yehrs, Occ. Service, R/o H.N6.5-1Og/10/2, Plot No.22, Radhe Naqar Colony, H.S Dargah, Golconda Hyderabad, T.S. 5OO 008

¶10

...PETIT|ONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its^prl. Secretary Home Department Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶13

The Commissioner of Police, Road No.12. Banjara Hills Hyderabad

¶14

The Station House Officer P.S., Golconda. Hvd-erabad

¶15

4 V. VIJAYALAKSHMI, Wlo V. Narsirnha Rao Aged about 66 years, Occ. Household Rt/o H.No.8-2-283l4, Ftat No.102 G.p. Etite Apartmenti, Road No 11 . Banjara Hills, Hyderabad

¶16

DEVINENI TARUN KUMAR, 9/o D. Sitharamaiah Aged about 45 years, Occ . Business R/o H.No.12-2-78418, Flat No.102 Range View Apartments,

¶17

, Ratibowli Hyderabad - 500 02

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or dtrection more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not providing police aid for implementation of an injunction order dated 2410212020 in_|.A. No.370 of 2019 in O.S. No 1799/2019 on the fite of Vil Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad duly considenng the petitioners complaint dated 25-03-2023 in respect of Ptot bearing No.421t6 and 421t7, admeasuring 357.90 sq. yards covered by Sy. Nos. 320/ 1 I A, 32Ol 1 I AA, 3ZOl2, 324 and 32611 an 2, Ward No.8, Block-1, situated at within the approved layout of

¶20

Osmanta^{[]nrYer;rt'/ E:mployees Cooperatrve Housrnqsocr€ l\ Lt(O' U Colony'} Sharkpet^{\i lllaloF yderabadDlstrictas illegalarbitar) ' ur1 lst andvlolattveof} princtples of^{lrat .lr ll} lustlce^{and vtolatton of Art 30t -A of Oons ltution o{ lndia'} consequertly^{cl elt the respondents 2and 3 to provite po lce aid to the} petitioner and^{hrs propertyby rmplementrng the inirrn';tro'lorcler dated} 24tO2t2O2O^{In I \No.370 of 2019rn O'5 No 17ggln19 or t ]e lrle of Vll Junior} Civrl Judgr:^{City C vil CourtHyderabad}

¶21

IA NO :1^OF2023

¶22

Pettttor.tlldsrsectlonl5lCPCprayingthatntheCicUrlstancesstated in the^{affrclavitf e(il11 support of the petition the HighCotrrt maybe pleased to} direct the^{respclcents 2 and 3 to provlde police ard to th€ p€titionerandhis} property by^{Inrpllnlentingthe injunction orderdated 24lo2l:'O201n l'A No 370 of} 2019^{rn O S Nc 1299/2019on the frle of Vll Junior Civrl J1ldr]s City Civil Court'} Hyderabad.^{pen lirrg disposal of writ petition}

¶23

W. P.^NO 11 o7i oF²⁰²³

¶24

Between:

¶25

SM L R^{,1 -AMMA W/o R Venkateswarlu Ageo.aoot I rj4 "ears Occ ' R/o} H No 8-2-^{t83t822F2,uoyog NaqiiFJnjaguttl'Hyder: bird 'S} ?i ;"" "r, ;,; :' b?i leid;i l.tgi$:Sf 'gf I Il a: ; ?,X i:..f, i":',:llX. 5o1? Aged ab(^{ut 44 years. ucc 'tlusllless rr'.,} '^{r 'v- 'i'} H'oeraba

¶26

"PETlrloNER

¶27

AND

¶28

1 The State^{cf Telangana, Rep' by its Prl Secretary Homel)epartment} Sec retani t,^iyderabad

¶29

2 Th. ..mr lis.sinner of Pollce,^{Road No.12, Banja'a Hills Fyderabad} 3 iil: 5;;ii;'j;;;;^{oni"er p s GorcondaHvderabad,} 4 DE/INEN ;;*;;ii ti> u^{I ARUN} rlo n-2-784t-B^{KUMAR d/"6"5itiffir6iii, FIat No 102 RangeVieru ngeoal)our \palments45 years occ} Rii,Ootrl^{lyderabad - 500 02} ... RES'ONDENTS

¶30

Petrtiorr t n(ler^{Article 226 of the Constitution of lnc ia prz yingthat in the} circumstarces^{;tated in the affidavit filed therewith'the lligh Court may be} pleased to issrt^{I an appropriate Writ order or directronm lr': p:rrticularlyone in} the naturc^{of ^ R T OF MANDAMUSdeclaringthe actrono tho respondents2} and 3 in not^{pr( vrlingpolrceaid for implementationof an rnjunction order dated}

¶31

¶32

04-02-2020 in t.A. No.392 ot ZO19 in O S. No.1861/2019 on the frle or V Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad duly considering the petitioner,s complatnt dated 25-03-2023 in respect of plot bearing No.421lE, admeasurrng 178.96 sq. lards covered by Sy Nos.320t1tA, 3ZOt1tAA. 3ZO:Z. 324 and 32611and2, Ward No.8, Block-'l , situated at within the approved layout of Osmania University Employees Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., O.U. Colony, shaikpet village, Hyderabad District, as ilregal, arbitrary unjust and vrolative of principles of natural justice and violation of Art. 3oo-A of constitution of lndia. consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 to provide police aid to the petitioner and her property by implementing the injunction order dated 04-022o2o in lA. No.392 of 2019 in o.s. No.1861/2019 the fire of Vil Junior civir Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. and such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of '1ustice

¶33

lA NO: 'l OF 202 3

¶34

Petition under Section 15'1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pteased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to provide police aid to the petitioner and her property by implementing the injunction order dated 04-02-2020 in I A. No.392 of 2019 in o.s. No.1861/2019 on the fire of Vll Junior civir Judge, city civir court, Hyderabad. pending disposal of writ petition

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. SRINIVASA MURTHy CHEEDELLA

¶36

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME

¶37

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶38

I IO i'I}t,I' SRI .ITiS'I'ICE C.V. BIIASK,,\I{ T.:I,,DI)\ \'li l'f^' PU'l-tl'lON Nos.ll072tnd I1073 r,f 2023

¶39

CO]\I\ION OIIDIIR:

¶40

'Vrrt l.lition No. I1072 ol-2023 is filed prayrrg thi:r Court to cleclarc tl'c actiern ol respondcnt Nos.2 and 3 in n rt rroviding Policc airl lirr irrpleruentation of the injunctiorr orrier dated 24.02.20)t) ir l.A.No.i70 o1'2019 in O.S.No. 1799 ol20 9 on the lrle of'VII urior Civil Judge, City Civit Court. I{ydtrabad in respcct ol ilors bearing Nos.42 li6 and 42117, ac rueasuring an cxterrt o ['.1,s 7 9,) squarc yards in Sy.Nos.320/1 /., 32lr 1 I h,, 320 12. 324 anrl l2fi l and 2, Ward No.S, Block-1, situiiterl^,n rrpprovecl layout ,ri' Os rnania University [rrnployees Co-operirtive Housing Socicty I-trl..^t.) U. Colony, Shaikpet village, Hvderat,arl, as illegal, arbitran, :rnr violative of principles of natural . usl ice and conscclucntll lii'ect respondent Nos.2 and 3 to prol'idt: l:'oli:e aid to the petitionel lbr implernenting thc above injunction order.

¶41

\lrit prtition No.l1073 of 2023 is also filcd ltrr the same relief i.e . lo ;^,rovide Police aid Ibr implementution c1 intunction order darctl lt. .lt2.202o in I A.No.392 0f 2019 in o.ll.l.lo.t861 0l'

¶42

)

¶43

\rc

¶44

ct Blt. .l WI'.N.,s.11072^{& I l07Jo/ 202'l}

¶45

20 19 on the^{hle of VIt JuniorCivil Judge,City Civil Courl'} Hyderabad,^{in respect ol ptot No.42li8admeasuring 178'96 square} yards, situated^{in the aforesaid survey numbers'}

¶46

Petitioners in^{boththese writ petitionsclaim to be absolutc} owners and^{possessors of the aforesaid plots in an approved layout'} having purchased^{the samefromOsmania UniversityEmployees} Co-operative^{HousingSocietyLtd', vide registeredsale dceds} bearing document^{Nos.94 of 1991, dated 10'06'1991and 1270 of} 2016, dated^{08.09.2015.It is the further case of the petitioners that} they are in^{peacefulpossession and enjoymentof the said property} and when^{respondent Nos.4 and 5 tried to interferewith their} peaceful possession^{overthe subject property, theyhave instituted} suits for^{perpetual injunction, vide O'S'Nos'1799of 2019and 1861} of20lgonthefiteoftheVllJuniorCivilJudge,CityCivilCourt, Hyderabad^{and also obtained ad interim injunctionin I'A'Nos'370} of2019 and392of2019'^{The respondents,after receipt ofnotices} in the said^{interlocutory applications,filedcounter aff,rdavitsand} contested the^{matters' After hearingboth sides, the Courtbelow} has made the^{injunction absolute,vide orders dated 04'02'2020 and}

¶47

)

¶48

-t

¶49

('t1tR. J ll'l'.'o;.ll ).. & t 101.t of 202.1

¶50

2.1.(ll..l0l0 I vcn alicr thc iniLrnction is r-nadc absr,it te. u'hen the lespon,ierts trietl to intcrl'erc rr,ith the peacclu[ 1,o isc:;sion, thc pctitioncrs;^' r\ e rra(le aplllications belore responderrt Nos.2 and J seekin!l l)oli rc aid tbr protcction ol- the injunction orrlcls.

¶51

'l hilr 'rru11, rvhile issuing notice belore r, mi ;sion olr 20.04.2023. rc mitted thc petitioncrs to take out pers.rIal notices to respon(len - ''ios.4 and 5- Rcspondent Nos.4 arrd -5 made appeara r)co tJ rrough tlieil Counsel Sri Vimal Verrna

¶52

5 I hc lc rlrred C-'ounsel appear-ing lor resp,.rnclen I lrlos.4 and 5 has vehenrctt lv argucd that they have not violatcd h: itrjunction orders grarrte I by the trial Court in any rnanner and t rt'pe rtioners, instead of fi rng appropriate applications before ttc triirl Court seeking Polic; aid for ir-r-rplementation ol injunctron r:rders, have straightrru,ay llied the present rvrit petitions. fhere[tre, the writ pctitions filed b r the petitioners are misconceivcd and tlre same are not maintainr ble in larv. Furlhcr, it is settled la,i, thlrt when injunction hi s been granted to the petitioners, firr sceking plotecti(\n rtl injunction. they are entitled to file an application

¶53

E:..,.....,--.\ ''.,:tB \ -tT*aA

¶54

¶55

¶56

CIIJIT, J tt'P.Nos.l l072 .1. I1073 of2023

¶57

under Order XXXIX Rutc 2A of Civit Procedure^Code . Instead o[ availing the rcmedies available^{undel the Civil Procedure Code, the} petitioners have filed the present writ petitions seeking a direction to the Police to provide Policc aid fbL irnplcmentation of^injunction orders in I.A.No.370 of 2019 in O.S.No.1799^{of 2019 and in} I.A.No.392 of 2019 in O.S.No.l86l of^2019.

¶58

A Division Bench o[ this Court in^{W.A.No.lS7of 2023,} while referring to the provisions o[ the Civil^{ProcedureCodc and} specifically referring to Rule 2A of Order^{XXXIX of CPC,has} held in paragraph l6 as under:

¶59

*16. That being so, we are of the view that petitions filed under Article 226 of^{the Constitution of} India seeking Police aid to enforce^{or implement} an order of injunction or,to^{restrain persons from} interfering with the order of^{injunction should not} be ordinarily entertained unless an^{element of} injury to the public or infraction of^{statute is made} out. Otherwise, it would amount^{to enteringinto} an arena of private dispute(s)."

¶60

As the petitioners are having^{altemative remedyof hling} appropriate applications under Order^{XXXIXRule2,A, of CPC, the} present writ petitions fited by the petitioners are^{not maintainable} and the same are accordingly dismissed. No^{orderas to costs.}

¶61

¶62

( t'ltR' J

¶63

ll P-\ox.l;(t-) '*^{Ittt''l 14 2t)1'l}

¶64

¶65

slr lll stand l,cnrli^{r0.l tl isccllalleotts applicatiotls' 1' att'''}

¶66

close(l

¶67

//TRUE^COPY//

¶68

'o'"i[3i'.Y;l$fREt'EFRRX .7^I I st:cTloN^d(rtceR

¶69

To,

¶70

1 Tvro OC^, kr^{GP FOR HOMEHrgh Court for the Slal€ ITelangana'at} 2 3)',4,?!^{i'5 8*!'L*, *'uosAN/u RrHYc H EEDELLT\ Advocate[oPUC]} a Two^{OD CrrPies}

¶71

BM G.JP

¶72

HIGH COIJRT DATED:0i't06t2023

¶73

COMMON ORDER

¶74

WP.No.11C72 AND 11073OF 2OZ3

¶75

HE Sr4I 6
,/:3
6
2 4 JUll 2$n

¶76

DlSMlSSlNri BOTH THE WRIT pETtTtOr\tSi WITHOUT r)OSTS

¶77

6
e l*
Lq
w{L

¶78

Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhar Rao v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Prof. R.V.R. Chandrasekhar Rao v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thurpati Sreenivas Vs The State of Telangana

Thurpati Hari Prasad Vs The State of Telangana

Cherukur Sravanthi Vs Union of India

Banka Narayana Vs The State of Telangana

Orsu Pardhasaradhi Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Ali Asghar Vs The State of Telangana