Writ petition filed by winners of a title suit seeking police protection to enforce a decree despite undisclosed defenses. High Court dismissed writ, directing petitioners to use Order XXI Rule 32 CPC in Civil Court first.
Petition dismissed; directed petitioners to file application under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC before the Civil Court.
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.
[32e6 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
SATURDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEIUBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 198320F 2023
Between:
ANO
...PET|TIONER
...RESPONDENTS
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, declaring of the action of the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in not provkling the police protection in terms of order, dated 28. 03. 2023 made in OS No. 79 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge, at Medak as being illegal and arbitrary apart from violative of Articles 14, 19,21 and 300- A of the Constitution of lndia and consequently to direct the 2nd aM 3rd respondents to grant police aid to the Petitioners for protecting the possession
and enjoyment over the suit schedule property admeasuring Ac. 07- 13 Gts in Sy. No. 61, situated at Marshetpally (V), Shankarampet - A Mandal, Medak District, by implementing the orders of court made in OS No. 7912017, dated 28. 03. 2023 in the interest of justice
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
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 unofficial respondent Nos. 5 to 8 to desist from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property admeasuring Ac. O7- 13 Gts in Sy. No.61, situated at Marshetpally (V), Shankarampet - A Mandal, Medak District, in the interest of justice, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition
lA NO: 2 OF 2023
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 Nos. 2 and 3 to grantpolice Aid to the petitioners in the interest ofjustice, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAMAVARAM CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1to3: GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: GP FOR REVENUE
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5to8: SRI N. MANOHAR
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'BLE SRI WSTICEC.V. BHASKARREDDY WRIT PETITION No.19832 of2o23
ORDER:
This writ petition isfiled to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and3 in not providing police protection in terms of order,dated 28'O3.2023passedin O.S.No'79of 2Ol7 by the learnedSeniorCivil Judge, Medakas i[egal ) and arbitrary andviolative of Articles14, 19,21 and 3OO-A of the Constitutionof India and consequentlyto direct respondent Nos.2 and3 togrant police aid tothe petitioners for protectingtheir possessionand enjoyment of the propertyadmeasuring Ac.7.13gts. in Sy'No'6 1 situated at MarshetpallyVillage,Shankarampet-AMandal,Medak District andpass suchother relief.
2
respondent Nos.S to g are interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment which necessiated them to submit a representation, dated 12.O7.2023 before respondent No.3 seeking police aid. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that the respondents_ police are not acting upon the representation, dated 77.O7.2023 submitted by the petitioners and not providing police aid for implementation of the judgment and decree, dated 28.03.2023 in O.S.No.79 of 2Ot7.
3
forcibly occupy the subject land. Therefore, thepresent writ petition hled by the petitioners is misconceived and the same is liable to be dismissed in limini.
4
petition under Order XXI Rule 32 CpC, as the case may be, but also an application seeking police protection under Section 151 CPC from the competent Civil Court. In the present case, since there rs a specific remedy available under Order XXI Rule 32 of CPC, the petitioners has to avail such remedy, if they feel that unofficial respondents are obstructing them from enjoying the fruits of the decree or if there is any disobedience or breach of the judgment and decree.
5
28.03.2023 pass€d inO.S.No.79of 2Ol7 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Medak.
sD/K. VENKAIAH ASSISTAN //TRUE COPYII REGTS
To,
SECTTON OFFICER
q
HIGH COURT
DATED:1611212023
ORDER
WP.No.19832 ot 2023
1 Hf- STAf €
oo)q 0 5 FrE 2024 ()z
.},
d'
t *
Or-' S PATCT,
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
ca,
@'
Qr>
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can grant police protection in implementation of a civil decree when a specific civil remedy under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC is available.
Whether petitioners in a suit for possession can claim police aid immediately under Article 226 without exhausting civil court remedies for attaching violators.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
T. and Thota Bhenamma
The State of Telangana
The S.P. Medak
The Station House Officer, Shankarampet
K. Anjaiah
K. Salliah
C.V. Bhaskar Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
