Dismissed¶53

Smt Qamar Siddiqua, And 9 Others v. M. Krishna Murthy, And 20 Others

Telangana HC17 Nov 2025CRP/1942/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court, Hyderabad; CRP No. 1942 of 2021; decided 17.11.2025 by Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda; petition under Article 227 Constitution of India against order in O.S.No.368 of 2007 (XIV Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Rangareddy District at L.B. Nagar); dismissed as infructuous on counsel's submission that cause does not survive; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; no merits adjudicated and no precedent cited, so the decision carries no ratio on the underlying dispute.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the cause in the revision petition does not survive for adjudication and has become infructuous, the civil revision petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶53

Smt Qamar Siddiqua, And 9 Others Vs M. Krishna… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴⁴³ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THESTATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH^{DAY OF NOVEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA}

¶6

clvtL REvlsl ON^{PETITION NO: 1} 942 oF 2021

¶7

Petition under^{Atlicle227 of the constitution of lndia aggrievedby the order in} passed in o.S.No.368 0f 2oO7 0n the file of the court of the XIV^{AdditionalDistrict} Judge^(Fast Track Court)^{Rangareddy Districtat L.B.Nagar'}

¶8

Between

¶9

I . Smt Qamar Siddiqua,^{Diedper LRs appellants 2 to 10 herein'}

¶10

Ahmed Bin Mohammed^{Basalam, S/o Md Bin AhmedBa Salam' Aged about} 50 yrs, Occ. Business.

¶11

3.SalehBinMohammedBasalam,s/o.MdBinAhmedBasalam,Agedabout45 yrs, Occ. Business.

¶12

4.ldreesBinMohammedBasalam,s/oMdBinAhmedBasalam,Agedabout3T yrs, Occ. Business,

¶13

5.ShoebBinMohammedBaSalam,S/oMdBinAhmedBasalam,Agedabout 31^yrs, Occ. Business,

¶14

6.OmerBinMohammedBasalam'S/o.MdBinAhmedBasalam,Agedabout2S yrs, Occ. Business.

¶15

Petitioners No.^{2 to 6 arc Rto 23-2-123/20,Moghalpura, Hyderabad'}

¶16

Haleema begum,^{W/o NazeerHamza,.Aged about 40 yrs, Occ Household'} Rlo 9-4-29117^lb, Tolichowki,^Hyderabad.

¶17

Fatima^{Begum,Wo.Abdul Muiee{'be-i1lpO.ylHabeeb Ba Omer,Agedabut} - 36'i; -o6. riori"nota, No i8-7-212t3018t21, Jahangir Nagar, Talabkatta' Hyderabad.

¶18

g.sadiaBequm,W/oAsaduliahBawazir,Agedabout30yrs,Occ'Household' R/o Sangi Reddy,^{Medak District.}

¶19

1O Haiera^(o Khatiia Bequm,^{wo.Abdu Baker Bin Abdullah Maatib,Aged 33 yrs'} '- oit. no:r.enoid, nlo"*.tlo 20-5-653, Shah Ali Banda, Hyderabad'

¶20

(Petitioners No. 2 to 10 are being Represented By their^{G P A STi Md Bin} Salam, S/o^Late Salam^{Bin Ahmed, R/o.Banjara)}

¶21

..Petitioners/Plaintiffs

¶22

AND

¶23

M. Kri:;hna Murthy, S/o. M. Bangaru, Aged about 78 years, Occ. Retd Employee,

¶24

C. Visrrveswara Rao, S/o C. Venkata Rao, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Businerss, R/o Flat No. 306, Block No. 1, CBR Estates, Deepthi Sree nagar, Hafee:rpet, Hyderabad.

¶25

Mr. B. Ramesh, S/o late Bhasker Rao, Aged about 44 years, Occ. Business, R/o Flirt No. 9, Hema Durga Residency, Engineers Enclave, Chanda Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶26

Mr. C. Venugopal Krishna, S/o C. Venkata Ratnam, Aged about 51 years, Occ. Eiusiness, R/o Flat No. 016, Block No.2, Sri Kalyans RBR Complex Miyaprrr, Hyderabad.

¶27

Mr. A.',/. Balakrishna, S/o A. Mallikarjun Rao, Aged about 41 years, Occ. Business, R/o Flat No. 205, Bloc no.1 CBR Estates, Deepthi Sree nagar, Hafee;zpet, Hyderabad.

¶28

B. Bherskar Babu, S/o B. Venkateshwar Rao, Aged about 29 years, Occ. Businerss, R/o Plot No. 129, Hasthinapur Colony, Sainikpuri, Secunderabad.

¶29

M/s Sri Vishnu Priya Builders, Office at 1'10, Block B, B. Vijaya Durga Estate, Nizampet Road, Kukatpally, RR District, Rep. by its Managing Partner Mr. M. Hari Krishna, S/o. M. Chenna Kishtiah.

¶30

M/s Proactive Realtors Private Limited, Having office at Flat No. 402, Geetanjali Enclave, Rep. by its Director, Rajashekar.

¶31

M/s Vensis Ventures Private Limited, Rep. by its Director Mr. Pamidimukkal Moharr Krishna, S/o P. Rama Rao, Aged about 37 yrs, R/o Flat No. 304, Jagrutr Towers, Begumpet, Hyderabad.

¶32

tU. Sudhakar, S/o M. Krishna Murthy, Aged about 45 yrs, Occ. Business,

¶33

M. Prabhakar, Wo M. Krishna Murthy, Aged about 43 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o H.No.'l-54, Madeenaguda Village, Srilingampally, R.R. District.

¶34

12.M. Narcimha Murthy, S/o. Ramalingam, Aged about 40 yrs, Occ. Business, R/o Flat NO. 308, Reliance Residency, Ramkrsihan Mutt Road, Hyderabad.

¶35

N.V. Ramana Reddy, S/o N.C. Nagi Reddy, Aged about 46 yrs, R/o K.V.R. Constructions, Vinay Nagar, Proddutur, Cuddapah District.

¶36

l4.Manikonda Anjaneyulu, S/o. M. Nageshwara Rao, R/o. H.no. 8-2-24117143, Nagarjuna Hills, Hyderabad.

¶37

15.AxiS Erank Ltd, Rep. by its Authorized Officer, M. Challa Bala Subramanyam, Southern Recovery Cell, Second Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai.

¶38

16.Jagan Reddy, S/o. K. Subhan Reddy, Aged about6l yrs, Occ. Business, R/o H.No.ll-30, Old RC Puram, Beside SR Chambers, RC Puram, Medak District 502 0?i2.

¶39

17.K. Satlanarayana Reddy, S/O. Janga Reddy, Aged about 52 yrs, Occ. Businerss. R/o. 25-3518, RR Nagar. Near TVIRF Colony, RC Pura, Medak Districi.

¶40

18.A. Rarn Reddy, S/o. A. Bal Reddy, Aged about 40 year:s, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.'3-49, SN Colony, RC Puram, Medak District.

¶41

Ch. Rangiah, S/o. Ch Janardhan, Aged about 61 years, Occ. Ret emplovee. R/o. H. No. 1 4-e4, sri Ram nasir' Coio"v,^{-pJtLiiriir,-il6J;k} d#;ilid;''

¶42

'oH,*1""111[,:Er?,i8,Hiliili,i,i,t":,:[r:E"#,i^j:tl.rJ"llfi faf,,,?, *ft#3-?d,3i,",":JFli#j,"A",SSIAET;:fi:,^?:.11i,f."f

¶43

"8,Jft ;?H;iii.r

¶44

(CRP 1 to 15 Not necessary) and (CRp not pressed Against R16 _21 only)

¶45

... Respondents/Defendents

¶46

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI MOHAMMAD AONAN

¶47

Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared

¶48

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶49

t.r,

¶50

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA CTVIL REVIslott PBrITION No.1942 of 2O2l

¶51

ORDER:

¶52

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the^pt:titioners submit that cause in the present revision petition does not survive for adjudication and the same has become^{inflructuous.}

¶53

Recording^the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, this civil revision petition is dismissed as infructuous.^There shall be no order as to costs.

¶54

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand clost:d.

¶55

SD/. U.SUDHA SISTANTREGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,