Disposed

Banoth Geethika v. Banoth Babu Rao

Telangana HC21 Feb 2025CRP/610/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Minors sought execution of a Lok Adalat award directing allotment of scheduled lands; the trial court's section returned their interim application as not maintainable. The High Court held maintainability objections cannot be raised at numbering stage and directed the trial court to entertain the application.

What did the court decide?

Section objection overruled; trial court directed to entertain the execution application and pass orders in accordance with law; original EA to be returned for presentation before trial court; no cost

Banoth Geethika Vs Banoth Babu Rao — Execution and Attachment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

I^s183 ]

¶2

I I II

¶3

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶4

FRIDAY, THE^{TWENTY FIRST DAYOF FEBRUARY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYFIVE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY}

¶7

CIVIL REVI^{SION PETITION NO:6 10 0F 2025}

¶8

PetitionunderArticle22ToflheConstitutionoflndia,aggrievedbythe order dated^{12-02-2025in Ep ftro. 55 of 2o24in LAC No 614 ot 2024 on the file} of ifre Corrt^{of theI Additional District Judge at Khammam'}

¶9

Between:

¶10

Banoth Geethika,^{D/o. Babu Rao, Age' 14 years' Occu'Student studyingth} Class in Harvest^{Public School,}

¶11

Banoth^{Venkat Abhiram,s/o BabuRao, Age 11 years,student studying sth} Class in Harvest^{Public School,}

¶12

3.^.Banoth Sai Ganesh'^{S/o. Babu Rao,Age 6 years' Student studyingUKG in} Harvest Public^School,

¶13

(All the Petitioners / D Hrs / Plaintiffs are^{minor's rep by theirmother Banoth} Si,i.ni wliiEinu^{nio, nge.33 vears, occu'Household'}

¶14

(All the minor Petitioners / D Hrs^{/ Plaintiffsand their mother are reside'nts} 'of ii:i'd.;-;d/A"^{cni-.-nuiri'iu,' iJ'i"p'iivillase'Khammam RuralMandal} and District

¶15

...PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS/D'Hrs/PLAtNTIFFS

¶16

AND

¶17

1 Banoth Babu^{Rao, S/o. Krishnamurthy,AS.e} 1q^{years' occu'Aqricultureand} Business. R/o.^{H. No.4-55/A,' Chi;ilid;nii, eotir'p"'mvillase-'Via Gandhi} Cno*i, fu"mmam^{RuralMandal andDistrict}

¶18

Anqothu Lakshmi,^{Wio.Chokla,nS"-'} . tB^{years' Occu'Household' Rlio'} ' fi .iiil_;dA,'-cr,innu inilia'i""iiiig"l Eouraprra*, Khammam^RuralMandal and District

¶19

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/J'Drs/DEFENDANTS

¶20

lA NO:¹ o^{F 2025}

¶21

Petition under^{order 39 Rule 1 and 2Rl/w Section 151 CPC praying thatin} the circumstances^{stated in itre atiOavit filed in supportof the petition' the High} Court may^{be pleased t" g;;;il"t";* injunction against the 1st Respondent/J'Dr}

¶22

I I I

¶23

No'1/ Defendant No.l restraining the 1st Respondent/J.Dr No.1/ Defendant No.1 from alienating or transferring tne petitionlE.ilsritt"n"oure properties in favour of third parties in any mannei titr the oisposli "r^{ti'" inp}

¶24

PROPEITEM NO."A"RTIES B" AND "C" OF THE PETITIO N/E P/SUIT SCHEDULE

¶25

Item No'A) originary agricurture -^{rand now convertedinto non} agricurture rand measuring to an extent of Ac 1_00gts "ri "f-j,ru".f 62 of Edulaouram village, Khammam Rurat Mandat ano oisirt*i '.,.X' ,Jr#lnin the boundaries of EJst. Mahabubabad Road, WesL, gy_pu., norJ, N;;h. Land of Banoth Bataii and Sliit;iJ,i1,""l,.H:";,i::'^{N"'i il"}'i''g il.;:l;st. i", i." it".'r'r;i l,rii,"

¶26

(The same is vatued at Rs.1 ,18,58.000/- oc certific r acre as per the valuation ates issued by the S.R.O ff,urra, nrrJfl Dated.23-02-2024)

¶27

Item No.B) Aqriculture land measuring to an extent of Ac.0-i 4gts out of sy No.'r62 of Eduraouram virage, xn"r,ir.n'n]rraiira"norl and District which is within the boundaries or.rrsi: H/lanlo,jo"orj"iiijo: y":r. Stare Hish way, No. ',A,, or the suit s"h;ilp;;;;;,"J""1,0 south. Land or Nunavath iilllii,

¶28

llli":ffiJi lfj'i:f:,['.,,18.,s8,000/-^{per acre and Rs 4r,50,300r} ror Ac 0- nriri, out;j.zil6r"_io;ij",^{certificatesissued by tre rarraslirrli,'r.nrri".,}

¶29

Item No'c) Agricurture rand.measuring to an extent of Ac.0-26gts out of the rand measuring Ac.2_00ots 9rt of Sv]lr"- r g'BiA/A,ttz 91 Edutapuram viilale, Khammam Rurat lri'andat ,"no oiJtii.i ',iii"L^I -nhin^{the boundaries of} East.GoVT Kasturba Scho^ot, west.f_an] "iiirh"t,i Bhaskar Rao, North.Land ot Banoth Bhaskar Rao and s"r,. i"ni orEriiiii's'r,.n" mother of rhe praintiffs and wife of the Defendantro.r jineo'iv ir,"" jJi"rir., *".., .

¶30

Counsel for the petitioners: Sri Kowturu pavan Kumar

¶31

Counsel forthe Respondents: None Appeared

¶32

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶33

¶34

THE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICEB' VIJAYSEN REDDY} N f 2

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

,^{The civil revision petitionis filed challenging the order dated} 12.02.2025^{passedin un-numbered EA'No 'of 2025 in EP'No'55of} 2024^{in LAC.No.614of 2026 on the file of the I Additional Dlstrict} Judge, Khammam^District'

¶37

The^{petitioners.who are minors and representedby their} mother-natural^{guardian,institutedLAC'No'614 of 2024 against the} respondents^{No.1 and 2' Sdttlement between the parties was} recorded^{by the LokAdalatand award was passedon Ot'Ol '2024'} As^{per the terms of the award' the respondentNo'1 agreedto allot} Items^{No.A and B of the suit schedule propertiesto the minor} petitioners^{jointly and equal shares with absoluterights' As the} terms^{of the award were not enforced''EP'No'55 of 2024 was filed} have been^servedonthe by the Petitioners'^Notices It is stated^thatpending respondents/ludgement^Debtors' execution^{petition, attemptsare being made by the respondents to} sell the^{EP scheduleproperty'As such' an execution applicationwas} filed on^{lO -O2.2O25} '^{The section has returnedthe application as not} maintainable.

¶38

¶39

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in peculiar circumstances and due to urgency, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court and requested this Court to direct the concerned Court to entertain.the execution application. It is stated that during the pendency of the execution application, if the subject property is arienated, it wourd frustrate the award passed by the Lok Adalat. The Court below has jurisdiction to pass interim order during the pendency of the execution application.

¶41

In the opinion of this Court, the objection taken by the section before the trial Court cannot be sustained. During the pendency of the execution petition, the parties are at liberty to take appropriate steps to protect their interest. The maintainability of the petition and the relief, if any, granted are the mafters to be decided on merits and such objection cannot be taken at the time of numbering of the apprication. The section objection is overrured and the I Additional District Judge, Khammam, is directed to entertain the peution and pass orders in accordance with law, by issuing notice to the respondents. As original EA is filed before this Court. the petitioners are permitted to file a copy of the application. On such copy, being filed, the original EA shall be returned to the petitioners to be presented before the triar court.

¶42

¶43

With the above observations, the clvil^{revision petition is} disposed of. The miscellaneous applications, if any^pending. shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

Sd/- T, KRISHNA MAR DEPUW^REG TRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

15X?'#t"''3iil3ffi'Jl"JJ:99ift',[i,1H1T;ateropUCr 3. Two CD^CoPies

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2110212025

:,. '-
r"<br>:
t--
2 4 ft$ ?0?5

¶53

ORDER

¶54

CRP.No.610 of 2O2S

¶55

DISPOSING OF CRP

Banoth Geethika v. Banoth Babu Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banoth Geethika v. Banoth Babu Rao

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

Sri. N. Venkat Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Poreddy Dayakar Vs The State of Telangana, Rep by its Secretary

Shyamala Ramanadham Vs The Station House Officer Women Police

Mrs. Syeda Aisha Naz Vs The State of Telangana

Lasetti Ramesh Vs The State of Telangana

Sheik Mohammed Rafeeq Vs The State of Telangana