Dismissed

P.Vasantha Priya v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Oct 2024WA/1204/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Intra court writ appeal filed by P. Vasantha Priya against a single judge order dismissing her writ petition due to alleged suppression of facts. The current bench dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, granting liberty to seek review without costs.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ appeal allowed with liberty to seek review of the impugned order under section 151 CPC.

P.Vasantha Priya Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^34{8 I

¶2

HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶3

THURSDAY,^{THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER} rwb rHousnND^{ANDTWENTY FouR}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{THE CHIEF JUSTICEALOK ARADHE} AND THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO}

¶6

WRIT A^{PPEALNO:'12040F 2024}

¶7

Writ Appeal^{underclause15 of the Letters Patentpreferred against the Order} daled 25tO7^{t2O24 passed in W P No l62 OB of 2024 on the file of the HighCourt'}

¶8

Between:

¶9

P.Vasantha^{Priya,D/o Late Kondakal Venkata ReddvWo Pedditi Mohan} Reddv, Ased^aoo,ti6 -vEl'l.s) eii'i'ry;'s' Latsnmi Na(l'ar' Near Lanko Hills' ivr""ii("tiuZGs^{i r, p uiparllu-a-a' r'v Ran g a ReddvD iskict Tela nga na'}

¶10

..,APPELLANT

¶11

AND

¶12

l.TheStateofTelangana.Rep.by_its.PrincipalsecretaryDepartmentof Municipal^{Administra'tviJn?'no'i;orn'o"velopment secretariat,Hyderabad.}

¶13

Metropolitan^{Commissioner,The Hyderabad MetrooolitanDevelopment} Authoritv. swarna -'uv"nii'do*pr"-'^sih;J"'! ry'"ddy^{Ndgar'srinivasa Nagar'} Ail;ilLi^{HF";#a - 50o03d relansana'lndia'}

¶14

The^{commissioner, Manikonda Municipality.Manikonda'RangaReddy} District. Telangana.

¶15

The Chairman^{andManagingDirector' Centlq!Power DiskibutionCompany} - iil; d"gri""i ehurun, n"t {ills, Hvderabad-500004'

¶16

The^{Vice - Chairman and Managing Director'H M.WS and S'B' Khairtabad'} Hyderabad.

¶17

TEAM4^{LIFE SPACES (ELITE) LLP' Representedbv its PartnerKurukuri} Raiesh Prasad,^{S lo'nir''S-a-tya-#rayaha[-ury-Xqri Aoe' 51 Years havingrts} opposite^Honda

¶18

seriice Re'oistered center,^{officeat Near sY:i;6'iX[: 'i'il;;"p-;upEima'ret'Miyapur'Madeenaguda} 'd6i'il)otie',p".zoitztAA'

Hyderabad-500049

...RESPONDENTS

II I i

IA NO: 10^{F 2024}

petition under secLion^{151 Cpc praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{filedin su rport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to} grant leave^{to the petitioner to raise additionalgrounds in the above writ appeal'}

¶24

tA NO: 2 o^{F 2024}

¶25

petition under se<:tion^{151 cpc praying that in the circumstarcesstated} in the^{affidavit fired insr_ pport of the petition, the High court may be pleasedto} suspend^{the Order'2507 2024 passedin W P No 16208 of 2024' pending} disposal^{of the writ aPPerl'}

¶26

Counsel^{for the Appella'rt:SRI DEVALARAJU ANIL KUMAR}

¶27

Counsel^{for the Respondent No'1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN URBANDEV}

¶28

Counsel^{for the Respondent No'2:M/s'T'V'S-U-D-H-A'REP'FOR} iir v.unnaslMiA^{GouD' sc FoR HMDA}

¶29

Counsel^{for the Respondent No'3:SRI G'MALLAREDDY}

¶30

Counsel^{for the Respordent No'4:SRI R'VINOD REDDY'SC FORTRANSCO}

¶31

Counsel^{for the Resporrdent No'6:SRI M'V'PRATAP KUMAR}

¶32

The Court^{delivered the following: JUDGMENT}

¶33

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND

¶34

TIIE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO

¶35

WRIT APPEAL No. 12O4 of 2O24

¶36

JUDGMENT: eer the Hon'bte the Chie.f Justice ALok Aradhe)

¶37

Mr. D.Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant.

¶38

Ms. T.V.Sudha, learned counsel representing Mr. V.Narasimha Goud, learned Standing Counsel for the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority for the respondent No.2.

¶39

Mr. G.Malla Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.3

¶40

Mr. R.Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the Transmission Corporation of Telangana Limited for the respondent No.4.

¶41

Mr. M.V.Pratap Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent No.6

¶42

This intra court appeal is frled against the order dated 25.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.16208 of 2024 by-which the writ petition preferred

¶43

¶44

¶45

by the appeilant has bcen dismissed, inter aLia, on the ground that the appefla-nt has misred the court and has suppressed the order datecl 08.02.1999 passed by the Joint Collector

¶46

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant want s to urge certain additional grounds u,hich rvere not raiserl before the learned Single Judge by u,ay of I.A.No.l of 2024. It is further submitted that the learned Singie Judge c,ught to have given an opportunity to the appellant to file al additional affidavit before dismissing the writ petitio;r on the ground of suppression of rrrateria-l facts

¶47

4 Learned c tunsel for the appellant seeks ieave of this Court to withdrau, the appeal with the liberty to seek review of the order dated 25.O2.2024 passed 1n W.P.No. 16208 o, 2024.

¶48

In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal is disposed of as u.ithdrawn in terms of the liberty as prayed for

¶49

¶50

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any,^shall

¶51

stard closed. However, there shall be no order as to^costs.

¶52

SD/- K. SHYLESHI DEPUTY EGIST

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRI DEVALARAJU ANIL KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶57

One CC to SRI M.V.PRATAP KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶58

3 One CC to SRI G.MALLA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶59

One CC to SRI V.NARASIIIHA GOUD, SC FOR^HMDA [OPUC]

¶60

One CC to SRI R.VINOD REDDY, SC FOR^TRANSCO [OPUC]

¶61

Two CCs to GP FOR MCPL ADI\4N URBAN^{DEV, High Court for the Stateof} Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶62

Two CD Copies

BSR

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2411012024

5[a.r c (i^
{ rnE
,,? t
o
,t I [tt' 2l?[ -5
\ .1.),
r)f S frA-;

¶67

JUDGMENT

¶68

WA.No.1204 oI²⁰²⁴

¶69

DISPOSING OF^{THE WRIT APPEAL}

¶70

AS WITHDRA\MN,

¶71

WITHOUT COI3TS

¶72

9A-
8 \ lrt l
\r ce

P.Vasantha Priya v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Vasantha Priya 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

Bandaru Sandhya Rani Vs The State of Telangana

Bharat Rashtra Samithi (Brs) Nalgonda Vs The State of Telangana

Bharat Rashtra Samithi (Brs) Nalgonda Vs The State of Telangana

M/s.Brahma Teja Paper Products (Btpp) Vs The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (Nsic)

Jitta Surender Reddy Vs Ram Kishan Bung

Jagruti Education and Welfare Society Vs Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Hyderabad