Smt Bhagyalaxmi vs The State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 3728 Tel

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



                  WRIT APPEAL No.608 of 2019


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




     The present writ appeal is arising out of the order

dated 10.06.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in

W.P.No.11086 of 2019.

     The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the

appellant before this Court has preferred a suit i.e.,

O.S.No.545 of 2014 in the Court of VII Additional Senior

Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, against

the same respondents, who were the respondents No.2

and 3 in the writ petition as well as the writ appeal,

praying for grant of perpetual injunction against the

defendants therein and the suit was decreed on

28.09.2015. It was alleged before the learned Single

Judge that in spite of the judgment and decree granted

by the Court, the respondents are interfering with the

peaceful possession. The learned Single Judge, in the

light of the civil suit which was decided between the same

parties, has disposed of the writ petition holding that

there cannot be any multiplicity of litigation and in case

the writ petitioner is having grievance in respect of

violation of decree granted in her favour, she has to work

out her remedies as available in law.

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn the

attention of this Court to towards the judgment delivered

in the case of Gulabchand Chhotalal Parikh v. State of

Bombay (Now Gujarat)1.

In the aforesaid case, the appellant prayed for

issuance of a writ of mandamus and a writ of prohibition

against the respondent/State in a writ petition filed in

the High Court on the ground that his liability as surety

for some contractors stood discharged on account of a

particular action of the State. The High Court dismissed

the writ petition on merits after full contest. He

thereupon filed a suit against the respondent and raised

the same plea that he was discharged from liability as

surety on the same grounds. The trial Court, the first

appellate Court and the High Court held that the suit

was barred by res judicata in view of the judgment of the

High Court in the writ petition. In those circumstances,

it was held that the decision given by the High Court in

the writ petition would not preclude the Court before

which the suit was filed from deciding the same question

on merits in the civil suit.

1 AIR 1965 SC 1153

The Code of Civil Procedure provides for a remedy in

case the judgment and decree are violated and therefore,

as there is a remedy certainly available under the Code of

Civil Procedure, the learned Single Judge was justified in

dismissing the writ petition. The judgment relied upon

by the learned counsel for the appellant does not help the

appellant at all.

Resultantly, the admission is declined and the writ

appeal is dismissed with a liberty to the appellant to avail

the remedies available under the Code of Civil Procedure.

The miscellaneous applications pending in this writ

appeal, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no

order as to costs.

___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 24.11.2021 vs