Dismissed

Chen Reddy Jyothi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Oct 2023WP/21061/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition and maintenance petition challenging the police inaction. The Court held that the complaint revealed a civil dispute over property and non-cognizable offences, and the police were not empowered to decide title or intervene in such civil disputes.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and maintenance petition were dismissed with direction to close miscellaneous petitions pending.

Chen Reddy Jyothi Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[3296 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH^{DAYOF OCTOBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASKARREDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 21061 OF²⁰²³

¶7

Between:

¶8

Chen Reddy Jyothi,^{W/o Krishna Reddy, ageQ about 48 years, Occ'} Housewife, R/o ft.ruo.:OS-RC,^{Saidabad,HyderabadDistrict.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

The Director Geneial^{of Police, Telangana State,Hyderabad.}

¶13

a. tne Commissioner of^{Police,Rachakonda Commissionerate,Neredmet,} Hyderabad.

¶14

+. ifie Assistant Commissioner^{of Police,Vanasthalipuram, Rachakonda} Commissionerate, Ranga^{ReddyDistrict.}

¶15

S. itre Station House^{Offider, VanisthalipuramPolice Station, Ranga Reddy} District.

¶16

O. - Actra Sritatn, No.ZSZ, ieachers^{1ry7o Hanmandlu,} Colony,^{Phase-|, Near Bob6iliDamodhar aged about45 years, Occ.Housewife, Reddy FunctionRyo Plot} Hall, Meertpet, Ranga^{Reddy District.}

¶17

A;h; Hanmanbtu,^{S-io Late Ramulu,aged about 55 years, oce.Housewife, R o} Clot flo.ZSz, Teachers^{Colony,Phase-1} ,^{Near BobbiliDamodharReddy} Function Hall, Meerpet,^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶18

...RESPONOENTS

¶19

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith,the High court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order^{or directionmoreparticularly one in the} nature of writ of Mandamus^{declaringthe action of the respondentNo.s in non-} receiving the complaint^{from the petitioner and non-initiatingto take necessary} action against the respondent^{Nos.6 and 7, who are sold the house bearing Plot} No.252, admeasuring^{150Sq. yards, Duplex house G+2UpperFloors, whichis} situated at Teachers^{colony, Phase-|,Near Bobbili Damodhar ReddyFunction} Hall, Meerpet, Ranga^{Reddy District to the petitioner and obtained the amount of} Rs.60,00,000/-^{(Rupees sixty lakhs), denied to execute the registration sale deed}

¶20

on the name of petitioner, and cheated the pelitioner, thereafter, questioning by the petitroner, abused the petitioner and create,l a panic situation by respondent Nos.6 and 7, is highly illegal, arbitrary, u nco nstit Jtional, violation of Articles 14 and 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consec uently direct respondent No.5 to receive the complaint from the petitioner and to take necessary action against the respondent Nos.6 and 7, who are sold the house bearing Plot No.252, admeasuring 150 Sq. yards, Duplex house G+2 Upper Floors, which is situated at Teachers Colony, Phase-I, Near Bobbili Damodhar Reddy Function Hall, Meertpet, Ranga Reddy District to the petitioner and obtained the amount of Rs.60,00,O001 (Rupees sixty lakhs), denied to execute the registration sale deed on the name of petitioner, and cheated the petitioner, abused the petitioner and created a panic situation by the respondents No.6 and 7.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶22

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition. the lligh Court may be pleased to direct respondent No.5 to receive the complaint from the petitioner and to take necessary action against the respondent Nos.6 and 7, who are sold the house bearing Plot No.252, admeasuring 150 Sq. yards, Duplex house G+2 Upper Floors, which is situated at Teachers Colony, Phase-|, Near Bobbili Damodhar Reddy Function Hall, Meertpet, Ranga Reddy District to the petitioner and obtained the amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees sixty lakhs), denied to execute the registration sale deed on the name of petilioner, and cheated the petitioner, abused the petitioner and created a panic sitrration by the respondents No.6 and 7, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAPOLU BHI\SKAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 5: AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7: -

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.21O61 OF 2023

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This wrrt petition is filed sceking following relicf:

¶30

" ... .pleased fo issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Wnt of Mandamus declaing the action of the respondent No 5 in non-receiuing the complaint from lhe petitioner and noninitiating to take necessctty ctction against tlrc respondent Nos 6 and 7 utho are sold the house beaing Plot No 252 admeasuing 150 Stq gctrds DupLex house G plus Upper Floors uhich is sttuated at Teachers Colony Phasel Near Bobbili Damodhar Reddy b\Lnctiotr Holl Meerpet Ronga Reddg District to the petitiorter and obtained the amount of Rs 6O 0O OOO/ Rupees stxty lakhs denied to execute the registration sale deed on the name of petitioner and cheated the petitioner thereafter questioning bg the petitioner abused the petitioner and created a panic situtttion by respondenf .Uos 6 and 7 is highly illegal arbitrary unconstitutionaL uiolation of Articles 14 and 30OA of the Constitution of India and consequently direct respondent No 5 to recetue the complaint from the petitioner and to take necessary action against the respondent Nos 6 and 7 tuho are sotd the house beaing Plot No 252 admeasuring 150 Sq yards D.Lplex house Gplus 2 Upper Floors uhich is situated at Teachers Colong Phasel Near Bobbitt Damodhar Reddy Function Hall Meertpet Ranga Reddg Distict to the petitioner and obtained the amount of Rs 6O,00,0OO/ Rupees sixty lakhs denied to execute the registration sale deed on the name of petitioner and cheated the^{petitioner abusedthe} petitioner and created a panic situotion by^the respondents Nos. 6 and 7..."

¶31

It is the case of the^{petitionerthat shehas entered into an} agreement of sale with^{respondent Nos.6 and 7 for purchasing}

¶32

E: 'f

¶33

¶34

Duplex ilousr: G+ 2 Uppcr Floors in housc bcaring l)lot No.252, irtlnrcarsrrnng 15O scluare lards, , situatcd at l'eachers Colortr,, Plrtrse I, I\4ecrpet, Ranga Rcddy District. It is tl're furthcr case ol Lhc pt:titioner that as pcr tlte terms and condilions of the agrccment, shc has pzrid an amount ot'Rs.60,0O,OO0/ and altcr rccciving thc said irmounts, respondent Nos.6 and 7 are not rcgisterir.rg thc salc deeds in her favour- It is the furthcr casc of thc petitioner that u,hen she has dernanded responclcnt Nos.6 arrri 7 to cxccutc thc saie decd in hcr'favour, respondcnL Nos.6 ancl 7 abused her in filthy languagt: and also threatcnecl her rvith dirc consequcnces. Stating thc above facts, thc pr:titioncr has lodgcd a complair-rt before rcspondent No.5, but, the rcspondents policc have not taken anJl action ergainst rcspondent Nos.6 and 7.

¶35

Lcartred Assistant Governnrent Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.l to 5 submits that acting on thc complair-rt, clated 15.07.2023 subm.tted by the petitioner, the responden ts-policc have made GD Entry and the said complaint disclosed that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and respondcnt Nos.6 and 7. Learned Assistant Government Plcader furlher submits that the respondents_police are not l-ravir-rg powcr or authority to decide the titte over thc subject property as claimed by the petitioner or to intervcne into the

¶36

¶37

¶38

thc disputcs lor non implemerltation^ol tl-rc^{terrns and} conditions alleged to have cxccuted^{by rcspondent Nos.6ancl7} in favour of thc petitioner.

¶39

As the complaint filed by the^{petitioner rcvealednor-r-} cognizable offences and also^{revealed thert tht:re are civil} disputes between the^{petitioner and respondent Nos.6 and 7,} the respondents police have^{rightly notcntertzrined thc} complaint submirted by the^petitioner.

¶40

ln view of the same,^{this writ petition is dismissed.Tl.rcre}

¶41

shall be no order as to costs

¶42

Miscellaneous Petitions,^{ifany, pending in this writ}

¶43

petition shall stand closed

¶44

SD/. K.SREERAMA MI'RTHY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// q

¶45

SECTION OFFICER

¶46

¶47

1 One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate IOPUC] 2 Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]

3 Two CD Copies

PSK. GJP t\ .

i:l

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611012023

ORDER

WP.No.21061 of 2023

rt\ ES Arq
(
q
(!
J.)
iJ 0 2 t{0\l 2023 c)
_.
lr
DfspATc'

¶57

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PE ITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶58

r\ {, er)

¶59

Chen Reddy Jyothi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chen Reddy Jyothi v. The State 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

Chatla Nagabhushanam Vs Mr.Chandrakumar

Kommineni Chaitanya Krishna Vs State of Telangana

Smt. Masula Swaroopa Vs Shiva Prasad Reddy

Smt. V.V.S.N. Lakshmi Kumari Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd. Shoeb Ali Omrez Vs The State of Telangana

Nandikonda Sobharani Vs The State of Telangana