This High Court order dismisses a Writ Petition dated 2009 as infructuous because the cause of action regarding land survey and demarcation no longer survives. No substantive decision or relief is granted.
None. The petition was dismissed as infructuous without any order for costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3303 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 16192 OF 2009
Between:
S.Ravi Kumar, S/o.S Venkata Subba Rao Business R/o.H.No.12-48,HUDA Colony Chanda nagar, Hyderabad-AP
...PETITIONER
AND
(RR2&3 are impleaded as per C.O. dated 8161201'l in WPMP 22102120091
...PETITIONERS/PROPOSED RESPONDENT Nos. 2&3
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 a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to survey demarcation and fixing of boundaries in land an extent of Ac.6.00 in survey No.257AA2 situated at Nandigama village, vide registered Patancheru Mandal , Medak District -AP l.A. NO: 1 OF 2009(WPMP. NO: 21254 0F 2009)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to survey demarcation and fixing of boundaries in land an extent of Ac 6.00 in survey No.257AA2 situated at Nandigama village, vide registered Patancheru Mandal, Medak District AP pending disposal of the above writ petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. MEGHANA REP SRl. P. VENKAT REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2&3: -
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENTVAS RAO
ItrRIT PETITION No.16 L92 of 2OO9
ORDE R:
When this matter has been taken up for hearing, Ms.Meghana, learned counsel, representing Sri p. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the cause in the Writ petition does not survive.
Recording the above said submission, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if
any, shall stand closed.
SD/.C. PRAVE N KUMAR ASSISTANT R GISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
To,
SECTION OFFICER
BM BS
t\-
HIGHCOURT
DATED:2611212023
ORDER
WP.No.16192of 2009
STAT€
I 1rE
7
q
of I I UI A l,! ?$?I .l)
o
+,'
*
t oF p Af o
DISMISSINGTHEWRITPETITIoNASINFRUGToUS WITHOUTCOSTS
{z<br>q*r
S Ravi Kumar S/o S Venkata Subba Rao
The Tahasildar, Mandal Revenue office, Patancheru
P Ramesh Kumar S/o Perraju
P Krishna Ralendra Kumar S/o Perraju
J Sreenivas Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
