Akther Zahida vs The State Of Telangana

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 827 Tel
Judgement Date : 17 February, 2023

Telangana High Court
Akther Zahida vs The State Of Telangana on 17 February, 2023
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, N.Tukaramji
  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

                              AND

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


               WRIT APPEAL No.205 of 2023


JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)


      Heard Ms. Asra Khanam, learned counsel for the

appellants; Mr. M.Roopender, learned Government Pleader

for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 5; Mr. Praveen Kumar

Veerjala, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) for respondent No.6; and Mr. Suresh Shiv Sagar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.7 & 8.

2. This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 07.02.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge declining to interfere in Writ Petition No.552 of 2023 filed by the appellants.

3. Appellants had filed the related writ petition seeking a direction to respondent Nos.3 to 6 not to interfere 2 HCJ & NTRJ W.A.No.205 of 2023 in the peaceful possession and enjoyment of house bearing Municipal Nos.18-1-544/1/A/8, 18-1-544/1/A/9, 18-1- 544/1/A/10, 18-1-544/1/A/11, 18-1-544/1/A/12 and 18- 1-544/1/A/13 on part of Plot Nos.6 to 13, in Survey No.93 totally admeasuring 1650 square yards or 1379.56 square meters of appellant Nos.2 to 7 and remaining extent of 250 square yards vide Municipal House bearing No.18-1- 544/1/A/14 on Plot No.14 in Survey No.93 of appellant No.1, situated at Kandikal Gate Village, Bandlaguda Mandal, Hyderabad (briefly referred to hereinafter as 'the subject property).

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that learned Single Judge did not refer to the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants and merely on the basis of the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and respondent Nos.7 & 8 declined to interfere.

5. From a perusal of the order dated 07.02.2023, we find that according to learned Assistant Government 3 HCJ & NTRJ W.A.No.205 of 2023 Pleader for Home, 2nd appellant had lodged a private complaint with regard to the subject property on the basis of which Crime No.406 of 2022 was registered by Chatrinaka Police Station under Sections 467, 468 and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Section 34 thereof. In the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer had visited the subject property. Thereafter notice was issued to the complainant i.e., appellant No.2 for recording of statement. Simultaneously, notice under Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C) was issued to the accused persons.

6. On the other hand, on behalf of respondent Nos.7 & 8, it was submitted before the learned Single Judge that appellants have filed a suit being O.S.No.16 of 2023 on the file of X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad which is pending as regards the subject property against respondent Nos.7 and 8 who have been arrayed as defendants.

                                4                  HCJ & NTRJ
                                            W.A.No.205 of 2023




7. In the light of the above submissions, learned Single Judge took the view that no orders were called for. Since the writ petition raised disputed questions of fact pertaining to the subject property which is being considered in O.S.No.16 of 2023, he declined to make any observations lest such observations be misconstrued while adjudicating O.S.No.16 of 2023.

8. We feel that learned Single Judge had adopted the correct approach while deciding the case. That apart, it is open to the appellants to seek injunction in O.S.No.16 of 2023 to restrain the defendants from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the subject property by the appellants.

9. In such circumstances, we do not find any good reason to entertain the writ appeal.

10. Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

                                5                    HCJ & NTRJ
                                              W.A.No.205 of 2023




11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.

12. Later on, learned counsel for the appellants appears and makes a prayer for withdrawal of the writ appeal.

13. We are afraid having dictated the entirety of the order in open Court, it is not permissible for the Court to recall the said order.

_______________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ _______________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17.02.2023 KL