A. Laksmi Narayana, Secbad vs A. Suresh Kumar, Secbad
2021 Latest Caselaw 2267 Tel

Item No.1



       THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                    AND
          THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
                             C.A.No.30 of 2017

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)


1.     On the last date of hearing, the matter was adjourned at the request

of learned counsel for the appellant, who had said that as the dispute is

between brothers, his client would like to settle the matter with the other

side. Today, learned counsel states that the parties did speak to each

other, but the appellant is unable to meet the demand of the other side.

2.     Mr. A.K. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the respondent

states that his client is not inclined to press the punishment of simple

imprisonment imposed on the appellant in the impugned order. The

concern of the respondent is only with respect to maintaining of status

quo ante in respect of premises No.6-1-00, Bapuji Nagar, Secunderabad.

He states that the appellant has been trying to alter the features of the

premises, which has already been partitioned between the three brothers.

The present dispute is only between the appellant and the respondent

herein.

3. We have enquired the status of W.P.No.29262 of 2016 filed by the

respondent. Learned counsel state that pleadings are complete in the

said petition and the same has to be heard finally. Both sides agree that

the present appeal may be closed, if on the appellant giving an

undertaking that he shall not carry out any additions, alterations,

variations or modifications in any part of the subject premises till the

writ petition is decided and if the said petition is decided in favour of the

respondent, then the appellant shall remove the unauthorised

construction in the premises in the shape of shutters, raising of walls,

grills etc., erected by him.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant is agreeable to the aforesaid

condition and states that his client shall file an affidavit on the above

lines, if granted some time.

5. The appellant is directed to file an affidavit undertaking inter alia

that he shall not change, alter, add or make any modifications in the

subject premises, during the pendency of the writ petition and in the

event the respondent succeeds therein, he shall also remove the shutters,

walls, grills etc., erected by him in violation of the status quo order dated

31.08.2016.

6. The said affidavit shall be filed within one week from today with a

copy to learned counsel for the respondent. The Registry is directed to

list W.P.No.29262 of 2016 before the learned Single Judge as per roster,

on 28.09.2021, for fixing an actual date of hearing in the matter.

7. The present appeal is disposed of along with the pending

applications, if any.

______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 02.08.2021 JSU/PLN