Muzammil Khan vs The Greater Hyderabad Municipal ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3349 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                               AND
            THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

                                 W.A.No.386 of 2019

JUDGMENT:        (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)



      The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

02.04.2019 passed in W.P.No.6925 of 2019.

      The contention of the appellant is that respondent No.4 is

proceeding ahead with the unauthorised construction and the

authorities are not doing anything in the matter.

The learned Single Judge in paragraphs 4, 5, 6 and 7 has

passed the following order:-

"4. Having regard to the respective submissions, there is no dispute that the petitioner has filed suit for partition with respect to the subject property and there was also an allegation that the 4th respondent is making constructions. As can be seen from the plaint document filed by the petitioner, in all fairness, the 4th respondent is the 2nd defendant in the suit and that the civil Court having considered the material on record had passed the aforesaid interim order with a further direction to list the matter on 28.01.2019. In those circumstances, as the petitioner had already invoked the jurisdiction of the civil Court with respect to the alleged constructions made by the 4th respondent and that the disputed questions as to whether the petitioner has right over the subject property or not and whether the sale deed alleged to have been obtained by the 4th respondent is valid or not, can be decided by the civil Court after fullfledged trial. Even assuming that the 4th respondent is making constructions without obtaining sanctioned plan, since the prayer in the writ petition as well as the injunction petition, as sought for by the petitioner, would incidentally for the same issue, the petitioner has remedy to seek amendment of the relief in the plaint.

5. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs."

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed."

Meaning thereby, the fact remains that a Civil Suit i.e.,

O.S.No.23 of 2019 is pending between the parties on the file of the

learned XIII Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar

for partition and in that suit, an application has been preferred for

grant of injunction alleging that respondent No.4 is making illegal

constructions. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the learned Single

Judge has dismissed the writ petition and a liberty has also been

granted to amend the Civil Suit. This court does not find any

reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single

Judge.

The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.

The miscellaneous applications pending in this writ appeal,

if any, shall stand closed.

___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 10.11.2021 JSU