Disposed

Mr. Thomas John v. The Government of Telangana

Telangana HC5 Dec 2023WP/18967/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of three writ petitions filed by plot holders seeking police protection to enforce civil court injunctions. The Hon'ble Court held that since execution petitions are pending in the civil court, the writ petitions were not maintainable for this relief.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions disposed; liberty granted to petitioners to approach civil court and file applications in pending execution petitions seeking police protection.

Mr. Thomas John Vs The Government of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s6 I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NOs: 18967 OF 2019, 30920 AND 32095 0F²⁰²³

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 18967 OF 2019

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mr. Thomas John, S/o. Late John Thomas,^{Aged about 81 Years,R7o.} 12-13-343, Tarnaka, Secunderabad - 500 017

¶10

Mr. Gregory John, S/o. Mr. Thomas John,^{Aged about49} _Ye-ars,^pJesently R/o. 13190 Boatwell, Route N, Stillwater,^{Minesotta, 55082, USA and} Permanent No. 12-13-343, Tarnaka, Secunderabad^{500 017, rep. by its GPA} Holder Thomas Jhon Petitioner No.1

¶11

tvlrs. Susan Arun, W/o. Mr T.V.Arun Kumar,^{Aged about 47 Years,Ryo.} 12-1-358131C, Lallapet, Secunderabad- 500^{01 7.}

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

The Government of Telangana, represented By^{its Principal Secretaryto} Government, Home Department, Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶15

The Station House Officer, P.S. Vanasthallipuram^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶16

Smt Vyjayanthimala P.D. Shah, Wo.^{Sri P.D.S_hah,aged about.63years,} Occ. Hriulewife, represented by^{her RegisteredGPA holder Govind Das, S/o.} late Sri Paramanand Das, aged about^{69 years, Occ. Business.}

¶17

Amrish, S/o. Sri Govind Das, aged^{about 36 years, Occ.Business,}

¶18

Viren, Sio Sri Govind Das, aged about^{34 years, Occ. Business,}

¶19

Nilesh N.Shah, S/o Late Sri Nandu^{Bhai N.Shah,aged about 55 years,Occ.} Business,

¶20

All are Rlio. 4-6-465, Esamia^{Bazar, Hyderabad.}

¶21

(RR 3 to 6 are impleaded as^per C'O.^{dt. 05.12.2023 in lA'No.2/20't9)}

¶22

Govind Das, S/o. Paramanand^{Das,.Aged about years, Occ. Business,Rl/o'} H.No.4-6-46'5, Esamia Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶23

(R7 is impleaded as per C.O. dt. 05.12.2023^{in lA.No.1/2022)}

¶24

...RESPONDENTS

¶25

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 pass an order, Direction or writ, particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent, the Station House officer, p.s. vanasthalipuram to maintain peace and tranquirity in Turkayamjar, by implementing the civil court orders, particularly the Judgment and Decree dated 02.06.2014 in o.s.No.'r056 of 2008 of the First Addl. Junior civll Judge, Ranga Reddy Dist., L.B. Nagar, confirmed by the Appellate court xlv Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy, at L.B. Nagar dated 13.04.2016 in A.S. No..l50 oI 2014.

¶26

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶27

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 pass an interim direction directing the 2nd Respondent, the station House officer, P.S. Vanasthalipuram to investigate in to the matter pursuant to the complaint dated 23-8-2019 in the spirit of the orders passed in o.s.No.1056 of 2008 dated 2-6-2014 on the First Addr. Junior Judge, Ranga Reddy Dist., L.B. Nagar, confirmed by the Appellate court XIV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy, at L.B. Nagar dated 13.04.2016 in A.S. No.150 ot 2014.

¶28

lA NO: 2 OF 2022

¶29

Petition under section isi cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to appoint commissioner to implement the judgment and decree dated: o2to6l2o14 in os No. 1056 oF 2008 on the file of the First Addr. Junior civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar confirmed by the Appellate court xlv Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar daled: 13104120i6 in A.s. No.150 OF 2014.

¶30

lA NO: 3 OF 2019

¶31

Between:

¶32

Smt Vyjayanthimala P.D..Shah, W/o. Sri P.D.Shah, aged about 63^years, Occ. Housewife, represented by her Registered GPA holder Govind Das, S/o. late Sri Paramanand Das, aged about 69 years, Occ. Business.

¶33

Amrish, S/o. Sri Govind Das, aged about 36^years, Occ. Business,

¶34

Viren, S/o Sri Govind Das, aged about 34 years, Occ. Business,

¶35

Nilesh N.Shah, S/o Late Sri Nandu Bhai N.Shah, aged about 55^years, Occ. Business,

¶36

All are Fl/o. 4-6-465, Esamia Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶37

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 3 to⁶

¶38

ANO

¶39

1 Mr. Thomas John, S/o. Late John Thomas, Aged about B1 Years,^Rl/o. 12-13-343, Tarnaka, Secunderabad - 500 017

¶40

2 Mr. Gregory John, S/o. Mr. Thomas John, Aged about 49 Years,^presently R/o. 13199 Boatwell, Route N, Stillwater, Minesotta, 55082, USA and Permanent Rl/o. 12-13-343, Tarnaka, Secunderabad 500 0'1 7, rep. by^its GPA Holder Thomas Jhon Petitioner No.1

¶41

3 Mrs. Susan Arun, Wo. Mr T.V.Arun Kumar, Aged about 47^Years,Rl/o. 12-1-35Bl3lC, Lallapet, Secunderabad- 500 017.

¶42

...PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS

¶43

4 The Govemment of Telangana, represented By its Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶44

5 The Station House Officer, P.S. Vanasthallipuram Ranga Reddy^District.

¶45

-..RESPONDENTS

¶46

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} vacate the interim orders dated 03/09/2019 in l.A.No . 1 of^{2019 in W.P.No.} 18967 of 2019 and dismiss the above writ^petition in the interest^of iustice.

¶47

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶48

Between:

¶49

The Government of Telangana, represented By its^{Principal Secretaryto} Government, Home Department, Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶50

The Station House Officer, P.S. Vanasthallipuram Ranga Reddy^District.

¶51

...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶52

AND

¶53

Mr. Thomas John, S/o. Late John Thomas, Aged about 81 Years, Fl/o. 12-13-343, Tarnaka, Secunderabad - 500 017

¶54

Mr. Gregory John, S/o. Mr. Thomas John, Aged about 49 Years, presently Fyo. 13199 Boatwell, Route N, Stillwater, Minesotta, 55082, USA and Permanent FJo. 12-13-343, Tarnaka, Secunderabad 500 017, rep. by its GPA Holder Thomas Jhon Petitioner No..l

¶55

Mrs. Susan Arun, Wo. Mr T.V.Arun Kumar, Aged about 47 Years, FUo. 12-1-35Bl3lC, Lallapet, Secunderabad- 500 01 7.

¶56

... RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶57

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 vacate the interim orders dt. 03/09/201S passed in l.A. No. 1 ot 2019 in W.P. No. 18967 of 20'19.

¶58

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI AKELLA SREENIVAS RAO

¶59

Counsel for the Respondents No.s 1 & 2: GP FOR HOME

¶60

Counsel for the Respondent No.3 to 6: SRI ASHOK REDDY KANATHALA

¶61

WRIT PETITION NO: 30920 OF 2023

¶62

Betvveen:

¶63

Thomas John, S/o. Late John Thomas, Aged about. 86 Years, Occ. Rlio. H.No. 12-13-343, Street No.2, Lane No.6, Talnaka, Secunderabad - S00 017.

¶64

Qmt. Clgllam Manjula, Wo Sathyanarayana Reddy, Age. 45 Occ. Housewife, Ryo. 9-59 Mallareddygudem, Sarvali, Survali, Nalgcinda - 5082353.

¶65

Smt. Bandi Vijay Nirmala, Wo Yadaiah, Age. 49, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. 7-453, lbrahimpatnam, lbrahipatnam Mandal, Ranga Reddy - 501506.

¶66

Pandi Swaropa Rani, Wo. Bandi Ramulu, Age. 54, Occ. Housewife, R!/o^plot No. 51, Hastinapuram Colony, Karmanghat, Hyderabad.

¶67

Kodali Venkata Lakshmi Annapurna, Wo Kodali Mallikarjuna Rao, Age. 58, Qcc.^{Housewife, Rl/o. H.No.B-2-2931821L, Ptot No. 192lA, RoadNlo. 12,} M.L.A. Colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 5000034.

¶68

Smt. Koyalkar Lalitha, Wo Koyalkar Prakash, Age. 65, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. 2-2-110315131A, Tilak Nagar, Opp. Railway Bridge, Amberpet, Hyderabad - 500013.

¶69

...PETITIONERS

¶70

AND

¶71

The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad.

¶72

The Comrnissioner, Rachakonda Commissionarate, Neredmet, Medchal Malkajgiri District - 500094.

¶73

¶74

The Station House Office, P.S.Vanasthalipuram,^{Ranga ReddyDistrict'} L.B.Nagar.

¶75

Govind Das, S/o. Paramanad Das, Aged about. Years, Occ.^{Business, R:/o.} H.No. 4-6-465, Esamia Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶76

Mrs.Vijayantimala P.D.Shah, W/o. Mr. P.D.Shah, Aged about.^{72 Years, Occ.} Housewife, F/o.4-6-465, Esamia Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶77

Amrish, S/o. Sri Govind Das, Occ. Business,^{R/o. 4-6-465, EsamiaBazar,} Hyderabad.

¶78

Viren, S/o. Sri Govind Das, Occ. Business,^{R/o. 4-6-465, EsamiaBazar,} Hyderabad.

¶79

Nilesh N Shah, S/o. Late Sri Nandu Bhai N^{Shah,Occ. Business,Rl/o.} 4-6-465, Esamia Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶80

...RESPONDENTS

¶81

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedtherewith,the High Courtmay be} pleased to pass an order, direction or writ particularly one in the nature^{of writ of} mandamus directing the Respondents^{No.2 and 3 to implementthe Civil Court} Judgments and the orders of^{the Hon'ble High Court and extend police protection} to the^plot holders in the layout^{of Sree Rangapuramin Sy. Nos. 213 to 217 of} Turkayamjal Village, Hayathnagar^{Mandal, Rangareddy District'}

¶82

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶83

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High court maybe pleased to grant} an order of interim stay^{of digging, demolitionor any interference in the Plots of} land of Sree Rangapuram^{Colonyin Sy. Nos. 213 lo 217 of TurkayamjalVillage,} Hayathnagar Mandal. Rangareddy^District.

¶84

Counsel for the Petitioners:^{SRIAKELLA SREENIVAS RAO}

¶85

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.1 to 3: GP FORHOME}

¶86

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.4 to 8: -.}

¶87

WRIT PETITION NO: 32095 oF²⁰²³

¶88

Between:

¶89

Smt.Vaisali Koratkar, D/o. Sharat^{KoratkarW/o.Ms. SubodKawaadkar,Aged} ibout. 53 Years, Occ. Advocate,^{F/o. 6-4-466, Nampally StationRoad,}

¶90

I /'

¶91

Hyderabad Presently residing at Bangalore Rep.by her father and GPA Holder Dr. SharatKoratkar S7o LateV.K.Koratkar R:/o.5-4-466, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad

¶92

...WRIT PETITIONER

¶93

AND

¶94

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

¶95

The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda, Hyderabad.

¶96

The Station House Officer, p.S. panasthalipuram, Ranga Reddy District, 4. Govind Das, S/o. Paramanand Das Aged about. years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H.No. 4-6-465, Esamia Bazar, Hyderabld.

¶97

Viren, S/o. Sri Govind Das Occ. Business, Rlio. 4-6-465. Esamia Bazar. Hyderabad.

¶98

...RESPONDENTS

¶99

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 pass order, direction or writ particularly one in the writ of mandamus directing the Second and rhird Respondents to extend necessary police protection to the writ petitioner by acting upon the complaint dated. 31t10t2023 to implement the civil court judgmentDt. 1611112016 in AS No. 302 of 2o1o of principat District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar in respect of suit schedure plot Nos. T1, T2 and 13 of the approved layout of sree Rangapuram in Sy.Nos. 213 to 217 to Turkayamjal Village, Hayathnagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar.

¶100

lA NO:1 oF 2023

¶101

Petition under Section 15'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant an interim direction directing the Respondent No. 2 & 3 to ensure that there is no digging, demolition or any other alteration in the suit schedule properties of o.S. No.3944 of 2006 and A.S. No.3O2 of 2010, namety ptot Nos. T-1,T_2 and T_3 of sreeRangapuram colony in sy. Nos. 213 to 2i7 oI Turkayamjar viilage, Hayathnagar Mandal, Rangareddy District.

¶102

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI AKELLA SREENTVAS RAO Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 3: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.4 & 5: - The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶103

¶104

HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶105

WRIT PETITION NO s.18967 0F 2019 30920 AND 32095 0F 2023

¶106

COMMONORDER:

¶107

W.P.No.18967 of 2019 is filed seeking following relief:-

¶108

' ...to pass an Order, Direction or Wit, pnrticularly, one in the nature of Wit of Mandnmus directing the 2"a Respondtnt, the Station Houx Offcer, P.S.Vanasthalipuram to mnintnin peace and tranquility in Turknyamjal, by implementing the Cil,il Court Orders, particularly the ludgment and Decree datecl 02.06.2014 in O.5.No.1056 of 2008 of the First Addl. lunior Cixii ludge, Ranga Redrly Dist., L.B.Nagar, confrmed by the Appellate Court XIV Addl. District and Sessions prdge, Ranga Reddy at L B Nagar dnted 13.04.2016 in A.5.No.150 of 2014 aruLpass...'

¶109

W.P.No.30920 ot2023 is filed seeking following relief:-

¶110

" ...to pass an ords, direction or wi[ particulnrly, one in the nature of zurit of mandamus directing the Respondents No.2 and 3 to imptement tht Cioil Court ludgmznts and th.e orderc of the Honourable High Court and extend police protection to tfu plot holdss in the layout of Sree Rangapuram in Sy Nos 213 to 217 of Turknyamjal Village Hayathnagar Mandal Rnngareddy Distrbt and pass . . ."

¶111

W.P.No.32095 of 2023 is filed seeking following relief:-

¶112

",..to pass order, direction or uit, pitrticularly, one in the uit of mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to extend necessary police protection to the urit petitioner by ncting upon tfu complaint dated 31-L02023 to itnplzment the Cioil Court judgment Dt.16-11-2016 in AS No.302 of 2010 of Pnncipal Distrit ludge, Ranga Reddy District, L.B.Nagar in respect of Suit Scfudule Plot Nos.T1, T2 and T3 of the approzted layout of "SreeRnngapuram" iu Sy.Nos.213 to 217 to Turkryamjal Vitlage, Hayathnagar Mnndal, Rang Reddy District, L.B.Nagar and pass..."

¶113

2. Since the property involved in all the Writ Petitions is one

¶114

and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order.

l t.

The facts in W.P.No.18967 of 2019 are taken into

¶119

consideration as leading case

¶120

It is alleged by the petitioners that they are the purchasers of plots forming part of Survey Nos.213 to 217 situated at Turkayamjal Village, Hayat}nagar Revenue Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. I4lhen respondent Nos.3 to 7 herein are interfering with their peaceful possessiory the petitioners and other plot owners have filed a suit in O.S.No.83 of 2014 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar and the said suit was decreed in their favour vide judgment and decree dated 28.08.2015 and granted permanent injunction restraining the respondents therein from interfering with the suit schedule property. Similarly, the petitioners have filed O.S.No.1056 of 2008 on the file of I Additional Junior^Civil ]udge,^Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar and after contesL the said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioners vide judgment and decree dated 02.06.201.4. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree dated 02.06.2014, the respondents therein preferred an appeal vide A.S.No.1SO of 201.4 on the file of XIV

¶121

¶122

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar and after contes! the said appeal was dismissed.

¶123

The grievance of the petitioners is that even after granting the injunction order, which was confirmed by the appellate Cour! the unofficial respondents are interfering with their peaceful possession and causing inconvenience for enjoyment of their property. Stating the said facts, the petitioners have submitted several representations before the respondents Police seeking police protection. As the respondents - Police are not providing the police protection to the petitioners in pursuance of the injunction orders, the petitioners have constrained to approach this Court by filing the present writ petitions.

¶124

Learned coursel appearing for the respondents has vehemently argued that during pendency of the first appeal, the petitioners filed an execution petition aide E.P.No.31 of 2015 in O.S.No.1056 of 2008 before the I Additional Junior Qivil Judge, Ranga Reddy District. After examining the documents and wikresses, the said E.P.No.31 of 20L5 was dismissed vide order dated1.6.12.2016. Since, the petitioners suppressing the fact of filing

f.i

EPs before the concerned Court, seeking police protection, therefore, the writ petitions are not maintainable and the same are liable to be dismissed.

¶129

In the said circumstances, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or tte inter se rights of the parties, deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petitions, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent Civil Court and file appropriate applications in pending Execution petitions seeking police protection and upon such filing application, the concerned Court is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders strictly, in accordance with law.

¶130

With the above observations, all the Writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶131

9 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, i{ any, pending

shall stand closed.

To,

"o'i5,',Sf I[f HtBI8IJXI fi,/ SECTION OFFICER

¶138

//TRUE COPYII

¶139

Il:" i,u?:3'"":"#:::#"8"ff U:',T^{*,' H o m} e De pa rtm ent, secreta ri a t,

¶140

The Commissioner of police, Rachakonda, Hyderabad.

¶141

ili::-"31;Ul:;t1i;or5tt,"^{*ondacom missiona} rate, Neredmet, Medcha r

¶142

,.,

¶143

¶144

The Station House Officer, p.S. Vanasthallipuram, Ranga Reddy District. 5. The Station House Officer, p.S. panasthalipuram, Ranga Reddy District, 6. One CC to SRI AKELLA SREENTVAS RAO, Advocate tOpUCl 7. One CC to SRI ASHOK REDDY KANATHALA, Advocate tOpUCl B. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶145

Two CD Copies ,\Y

BSR GJP

t I

HIGH COURT

DATED: 05112t2023

COMMON ORDER

1 HE STA r4r
(
q
3 ) 21 0Et 2023 az
.t.
* o8.9Pficsf

¶153

WP.Nos. 18967 OF 2019, 30920 AND 32095 OF 2023

¶154

DISPOSING OF ALL THE WRIT PETITIONS,

¶155

WITHOUT COSTS

¶156

@x@

Mr. Thomas John v. The Government of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Thomas John v. The Government of Telangana

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

Sri Ch Giridhar Babu Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Sabiha Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Suchit R Dubey Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Ismail Vs The State of Telangana

Degam Sayanna Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Balusu Rajya Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana