Konidala Rajeswaramma vs Rudraraju Harish
2024 Latest Caselaw 4897 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Konidala Rajeswaramma vs Rudraraju Harish on 28 June, 2024

Author: Ninala Jayasurya

Bench: Ninala Jayasurya

APHC010244402024
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH Bench Sr.No:-26
                                                           [3443]
                                AT AMARAVATI

                         WRIT APPEAL No.535 of 2024

Konidala Rajeswaramma and others                                        ...Appellant(s)

      Vs.

Rudraraju Harish and others                                           ...Respondent(s)

                                       *********

Sri P. Durga Prasad, Advocate for the appellants.

CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

DATE : 28th June 2024

PC:

The present writ appeal has been preferred against the judgment and

order, dated 24th of April, 2024 passed in WP.No.6795 of 2024.

2. The aforementioned petition was filed by the petitioner

(respondent No.1 herein). The claim of the petitioner was that despite there

being an order of injunction granted in his favour, the unofficial respondents

(appellants herein) were interfering with the peaceful possession and

enjoyment of the property in question.

3. It was stated that the petitioner had made a representation to the

official respondents on 09.03.2024 but no orders had been passed on the said

representation.

HCJ & NJS,J WA_535_2024

4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the petition

was disposed of by giving a direction to the police authorities to provide aid as

and when required by the petitioner keeping in view the order of injunction.

5. It was urged that the aforementioned order was in excess of the

relief prayed for by the petitioner inasmuch as no prayer had been made by

the petitioner in the petition seeking police protection. In any case, it is stated

that the interim injunction which had been obtained by the petitioner

(respondent No.1 herein) was vacated on 18.06.2024 and that the appellants

were in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property in question.

6. There is no representation on behalf of the respondents.

7. While it may be true that there was an order of injunction issued

in favour of the petitioner on the date when the petition came to be disposed

of with a direction to the police authorities, yet, in our opinion, the said

direction for police aid need not continue in his favour in view of the fact that

the order of injunction has since been vacated on 18.06.2024. Since the

parties are already before the Court, in case there is any such situation where

the parties feel insecure, it would be open to either of them to approach the

civil Court for appropriate orders. The order impugned shall stand modified

accordingly to that extent.

8. The Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

HCJ & NJS,J WA_535_2024

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ

NINALA JAYASURYA, J

Vjl