Dismissed

Nallu Sakkubai v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Dec 2024WP/11210/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging land entries and alleging fraud in execution of a gift deed was dismissed. The Court held that validity of documents and fraud allegations must be examined by a civil court, not under Article 226 jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

No order as to costs; the writ petition is disposed of leaving the petitioner to approach the competent civil court regarding alleged fraud.

Nallu Sakkubai Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

I32e6l

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 11210 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Nallu lakkubai, W/o. Late Veera Reddy, Aged about 87 yrs, Occ . House Hold, R/o H. lV, 4-2, Kasarlapahad ' Vill-age, Jajireddygudem Mandal, Suryapet District, Telangana State.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The District Collector, Suryapet District, Having its office at Suryapet.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Suryapet Division, Having its office at Suryapet.

¶14

The Tahsildar cum Joint Sub-Registrar, Jajireddygudem Mandal, Suryapet District, Having its office at Jajireddygudem, Suryapet.

¶15

Nallu Ramachandra Reddy, s/o Late Veera Reddy, Aged about 68 Yrs, Occ. {griculture,^{R/o.H. No. 23-103, Plot no. 324,Jaia Priya SouthApartments,} Gaddiannaram, Saroomagar, Hyderabad_

¶16

Nallu Sadana, w/o Ramachandra Reddy, Ag-ed about 59 years, Occ. House Hold R/o. H. No. 23-103, Plot no. 324, Jana Priya South Apartments, Gaddiannaram, Saroomagar, Hyderabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by directing the respondents no.1 to 4 authorities herein to set aside the dharani entries, including the pass book and title deed in respect of agriculture land of Ac.4-09gts in Sy no.82l1, by deleting the names of Respondent no.5 & 6 and incorporate the name of the petitioner to the extent of her legitimate share by considering the representations dated

¶19

24-04-2023 as being llegal, arbitrary and violate of Article 14,21 of the constitution of lndia.

¶20

IA NO :1 0F 2024

¶21

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the mutation proceedings, dharani portar entries and digitar pass books of respondent no.S and 6.

¶22

IA NO:20F 2024

¶23

petition under Se n the arridavit,,,"o,n ","J'Jjn';,fH::::^Hil Hffi,J"j:T:::]:: grant the ad interim injunctions orders restraining the respondents from arienating the rand admeasuring Ac.4-09 gts in sy no. 82/113, B2t114 (g2r1) of Kasarrapahad Vi,age, in favour of third parties, ti, disposar of the writ petition.

¶24

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI GOLI VIPLAV REDDY Counsel forthe Respondent No.1 to 4: AGp FOR REVENUE

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.S & 6: SRI L.HARISH

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASI{AR REDDY

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.112lO of 2024

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This writ petition is filed with the following relief:-

¶31

"-..to issue utit, direction or order more particuktrlg in the nqtare of Wit of Mandamus by directing the respondents No.l to 4 authoities herein to set aside the dhorani entnes, including the passbook and title deed in respect of agricu\ture land of Ac.4-O9 gts tn Sg.No.92/ 1, by deleting the names of respond.ent No.S & 6 and incorporate th.e name of th.e petitioner to the ertent of her legitimate share bV consideing the representations dated 24.04.2023 as being illegal, arbitrary and uiolate of ArticLe 14, 21 of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders as mag deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of^justice".

¶32

Heard Sri Goli Viplav Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, for respondent Nos.l to 4 and Sri L.Harish, learned counsel for respondent Nos.S and 6 and perused the record.

¶33

It is stated that the petitioner is the owner and^pattadar of the agriculture land to an extent of Ac.04-09 gts in survey^{No.82/ f} , situated at Kasarlapahad Village, Jajireddygudem Mandal, Suryapet District. It is stated that taking her old age as an^advantage, respondent Nos.S and 6 herein by playing fraud have made her^to execute a registered gift deed vide document No. 163 of 2021,^dated O3.O4.2021 with the assistance of respondent No.4. It is stated that since respondent Nos.S and 6 by playing fraud have obtained _ * -tegistered gift deed, consequential entries in revenue records and

¶34

¶35

,l '-1

¶36

CVBR, J \vo 11210 2024

¶37

lssuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds were vrtiated by act of fraud and prayr:d this Court to set aside the said entries and restore the entries ol the petitioner in revenue records.

¶38

4- Learned counser for respondent Nos.s and 6 submits that the petitioner has executed a registered gift deed vide document No. 163 of 2O2I dated 03.04.2021 in favour of respondent Nos.S and 6 having present before the Tahsildar in the presence of the witnesses, transferring the, property absolutely and there rs no condition -a whatsoever in the registered gift deed, even though the document executed in the year 2021, the petitioner has not taken any steps either for cance,llation of the said documen t or approached the competent civil C)ourt or making any representation on the fite of the respondent authorities saying that taking her old age as an advantage by playing fraud respondent Nos.S and 6 have obtained the gift deed and consequential mutations.

¶39

The issues raised in this writ petition with regard to validity or otherwise of the documents and the allegations relating to forgery and fraud are required to be examined by the competent crvil court. This court, while exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 0f .,'e Constitution of India, would not decide the same in a writ petition.

¶40

I I

¶41

¶42

CVBR, J wp tt2lo-2024

¶43

'-7

¶44

In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to agitate her^grievances, if any, relating to the documents alleged to have been obtained by respondent Nos.5 and 6 by playing fraud, before the competent Civil Court, in accordance with law. No order as to costs

¶45

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this

¶46

writ petition shall stand closed

¶47

SD/-L.LAKSHMI^BABU ASSISTANT GISTRAR

¶48

//TRUE COPY//

¶49

SE ON OFFICER

¶50

To, 1. The Principle Secretary,^{Revenue Department, Secretariat,Hyderabad, State} of Telangana.

¶51

The District Collector,^{Suryapet District, Having its olfice at Suryapet'}

¶52

The Revenue^{Divisional officer, Suryapet Division, Havingits office at} Suryapet.

¶53

The Tahsildar^{cum Joint Sub-Registrar, JajireddygudemMandal'Suryapet} District, Having^{its office at Jajireddygudem, Suryapet'}

¶54

One CC to SRI^{GOLIVIPLAV REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]}

¶55

One CC to^{SRI L.HARISH,Advocate} [OPUC]

¶56

Two CCs to^{GP FoR REVENUE, High Courtfor the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUTI

¶57

Two CD Copies

BSR/BSK ,/

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0911212024

IHC Sf ,{ 11:
oJo+ (.(
0 7 JAil 2025
t.Z
t
oFsp ,,\T C r i€o
----)>
:l

¶63

ORDER

¶64

WP.No.1 1210^{of 2024}

¶65

DISPOSING OF^{THE WRIT PETITION,}

¶66

WITHOUT COSTS

¶67

2
/-/$
st{

Nallu Sakkubai v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nallu Sakkubai 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Variyal Prern Kumar Reddy alias Jariyal Prem Kumar and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Choppari Anjaiah Vs Vusthem Veeresham

Peddinti Laxmi Vs The State of Telangana

Minnala Balaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sayini Sathish and another Vs The State of Telangana and 7 others

Avula Anjaiah Vs The State of Telangana