Petitioner sought a writ directing police to act on his complaint and provide protection for property subject to interim injunction in O.S.No.163/2024. Police reported FIR No.258/2025 already registered against respondent No.5. Court disposed of the petition directing authorities to follow due process, permitting pursuit of civil remedies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[325s ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 27823 OF 2025
Between:
S.V.Ranga Rao, S/o S.Koteshwar Rao, Aged 43, Occ: Business, C/o. A.Vinay QqlU.68,Jalvayu Vihar, near Shiva Parvati Theatre, JNTU Post, Kukatpally R.R.District.
Permanent R/o.103, Sri Venkatadri Towers, Panchayath Road, Near Old Panchayat Office, Sahampadu, Eluru District., Andhra Pradesh State.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under A.rticle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus, to declare the in-action of the Respondent No. 2 to 4 on the comptaint dated 1 1-09-2025 in implementing the orders Vide lA Nos. 1504 and 1505 of 2O24 in O.S. No. 163 of 2024 passed by the ll Additional Chief Judge, City Civit Court, Hyderabad and to take immediate and necessary steps to provide adequate police protection to the Petitioner for safeguarding his property bearing Municipal No. 1O-2-289t56, Shanthi Nagar Colony, Masab Tank, Hyderabad and from changing its nature as this the Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue the directions to the Respondent No. 3 and 4 to act upon the complaint dated .1 1_ 9-2025 lo implement the lnterim orders in l.A. Nos. 1504 and 1505 of 2024 in O.S. No. 163 of 2024, passed by the ll Additionat Chief Judge, City Civit Court, Hyderabad till its disposal and provide police protection of the subject property
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K L B KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: ASST Gp FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.5: NONE APPEARED
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE
.v
7823
This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:
"...to declare the inaction of the Respond.ent Nos.2 to 4 on the complaint dated. 11.09.2025 in implementing the orders Vid.e /A..tr[os. 1SO4 and 15OS of 2024 fn O.S.No.t63 of 202a passed by the II Additional Chief Jud"ge, Citg Ciuit Court, Hgderabqd and to take immed.iqte and. necessary steps to prouide adequate police protectton to the Petttioner for safeguarding his propertg bearing Municipal No.10-2-289/ 56, Shanthi Nagar Colong, Masab Tank, Hgderabad. and. from changing its nature... "
2
brother and a sister. During the lifetime of petitioner's grandfather, he has purchased residential property bearing Municipal No.lO-2-289/56, admeasuring 446 sq.yds., at Shanthi Nagar Colony, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. On demise of petitioner's grandfather on 18.07.1974, petitioner's father who is the only son became owner of said property. It is submitted that in the year 1995, petitioner's family leased out the saicl property to respondent No.5 on monthly basis. Subsequently, respondent No.5 occupied the premises and uras not paying the rents. Accordingly, petitioner's paternal aunt filed a suit against respondent No.5 in O.S.No.1115,1 1998 before XI Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad. The said suit was decreed against respondent No.5. Thereafter, respondent No.5 filed appeal in CCCA.No.33/2003 before this Court and ho'rrever, started depositing rents. It is further submitted that respondent No.5 fabricatecl a forged agreement dated 23.08.2002 and obtained a false decree from tl Additional Chief Judge, Hyde:rabad by misrepresenting facts and registered the sale deed. Accordingll', petitioner lodged a criminal complzdnt in CCS Police Station, who registered a case and fited charge sheet
J
in C.C.No.l38/2O17 before XII ACMM Court, Hyderabad. The court confirmed that signatures of petitioner and his brother and sister were forged. As such, petitioner filed O.S.No. 16312024 before II Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad for cancellation of fraudulent decree and sale deed. The said court granted interim injunction in I.A.Nos.1504 and 1505 of 2024 dated Lg.oz.2024 restraining respondent No.5 from carrying out any constructions activities on the said property.
3.1. It is further submitted that despite injunction orders, respondent No.5 continued illegal construction on the property. when the petitioner mad.e several efforts to stop the construction, respondent No.S instead of stopping the construction has threatened the petitioner to withdraw the civil suit. Thereafter, when the petitioner visited the said property on a couple of occasions, petitioner noticed that respondent No.S is continuing with construction activity. In that regard, petitioner lodged a complaint before respondent No.4 against respondent No.5 and his associates. However, respondent No.4 did not register the
4
said cornplaint. Questioning the sarne, the present writ petition is filed.
\
5
Miscellaneouspetitions' pending'if any' shall stand
closed.However,there shall be no order as to costs'
Sd/.U.SUDHA
ANT
//TRUE COPY/
SECTION OFFICER
rA-
MMT PMK
HIGH COURT
DATED :1StOst2O2s
ORDER
WP.No.278 23 of 2O2S
' o
0J Lit w ' .i
b,.)ur!
x
t -/::. 'tra
T[;r; r''l
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT COSTS
?A
"t 1<br>
1 issue framed by the court
Whether police inaction on the petitioner's complaint seeking implementation of interim injunction orders and protection of his property warranted mandamus.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
S.V.Ranga Rao
The State of Telangana, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Home Department
The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City Police Commissionerate
The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Zone
The Station House Officer, Nampally Police Station
G. Srinivas
N.V. Shravan Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
