Vemula Biksham vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1921 Tel

      HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

               WRIT PETITION No. 16627 of 2022

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of

the 2nd respondent in not implementing the judgment passed in

O.S.No. 24 of 2018 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at

Suryapet, dated 19.02.2019, granting permanent injunction

restraining Respondents 3 and 4 from interfering with the

agricultural land in Survey No. 142/2 in an extent of Ac.1.0750,

Survey No. 142/1 in an extent of Ac.1.0750, Survey No.

231/4/2, in an extent of Ac.0.2550, in Survey No. 231/4/1 in

an extent of Ac.0.2550, Survey No. 231/2/3 in an extent of

Ac.0.2700, Survey No. 260/1 in an extent of Ac.1.10, total

extent of Acs. 5.23 guntas situated at Kasarlapahad Village,

Arvapally Mandal by extending police aid.

2. Sri D.Y.N.L.N. Charyulu, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the suit against

Respondents 3 and 4 for declaration of title and perpetual

injunction. As the subject lands are patta lands, the revenue

department has issued title in favour of the petitioner. It is

stated that the said suit is decreed declaring that the petitioner

and Smt.Vemula Ilamma are absolute owners and possessors of

the lands and restraining Respondents 3 and 4 from interfering

with the possession of the property. It is stated that the said

decree has become final and no appeal is preferred against the

said order. It is also stated that as the petitioner failed to

cultivate the land in view of the interference of the official

respondents, he has approached the 2nd respondent to extend

help and implement the decree. Learned counsel submits that

as the respondents failed to take any action, the petitioner is

constrained to approach this Court.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home

Sri S. Ramamohana Rao, on instructions, submits that in a way

the petitioner is seeking execution of the decree and for

executing a civil Court's decree, there is a procedure available

before the Court. He submits that under Order 39 Rules 1 and

2 C.P.C., the trial Court has no power to execute the decree and

when there is an effective alternative remedy available to the

petitioner, he cannot approach this Court for the said purpose.

He also relied on the judgment of this Court in Writ Appeal No.

38 of 2022, wherein by order dated 28.01.2022, having

considered the judgment in Satyanarayana Tiwari v. S.H.O.

P.S. Santhoshnagar1, this Court has still held that the

AIR 1982 AP 394

appellant has an effective alternative remedy to approach the

trial Court and make an appropriate Application seeking

execution of the decree.

5. In this case, the civil Court has decreed the suit

filed by the petitioner on 19.02.2019 and the 5th respondent

who is the wife of the 3rd respondent herein is not a party to the

said suit. When the suit is filed in the year 2019 and without

filing execution petition, they seek police protection to

implement the decree. If the execution petition is filed before the

Court, if a third party is in possession of the property, they have

a remedy to file a claim petition under Order 21 Rule 97 C.P.C.

and the Court will decide the rights of the said petitioner after

giving an opportunity and if the said claim petition is dismissed,

he has a remedy to file an Appeal against the judgment and

decree. The Court below will have an opportunity to look into all

these aspects. If this Court, in a summary manner, directs the

police to grant protection for executing the decree, in case there

is any other person / 3rd party in possession of the said

property, police will not be able to decide the rights of the 3rd

parties but for providing police protection for executing the

decree. Hence, by all means, this Court cannot go into that

issue and appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file an

Application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC.

6. The Writ Petition is accordingly, dismissed. There

shall be no order as to costs.

___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 18th April 2022

ksld