Smt. Manuka Laxmi vs State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 4001 Tel

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



                     WRIT APPEAL No.164 of 2021


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


     On 04.06.2021 Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned proxy

counsel appearing for learned counsel for the appellant,

sought for an adjournment.                  On 16.07.2021, again the

learned proxy counsel sought an adjournment stating

that the arguing counsel has gone to his native place.

On 22.10.2021 again the learned counsel for the

appellant sought for short adjournment.                        The case was

adjourned      for     today.          Today        also      a    prayer   for

adjournment has been made and the same is declined.

     The facts of the case reveal that the writ petition

was preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner stating

that she is the absolute owner and possessor of land to

an   extent     of    Acs.2.00         in    Survey         No.386/136       of

Nimmapelli Village, Konaraopet Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla

District.   It was stated that the unofficial respondents,

with the help of anti-social elements started trespassing

into her land and demolished the boundary wall and in

those circumstances, a civil suit was preferred i.e.,

O.S.No.295 of 2020 before the Court of Junior Civil

Judge, Sircilla, which is still pending. The writ

petitioner, by filing the writ petition, prayed for grant of

injunction restraining the respondents from interfering

with her peaceful possession. The learned Single Judge

has dismissed the writ petition holding that any

application for injunction during the pendency of the civil

suit has to be filed before the civil court and the disputed

questions of fact, especially when the civil suit is

pending, cannot be looked into in exercise of powers

conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the considered opinion of this Court, the order

passed by the learned Single Judge does not warrant any

interference. The appellant is certainly at liberty to file

an appropriate application in the pending civil suit.

The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed. 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 30.11.2021 vs