Telangana High Court
Church Of South India Trust Assn., ... vs The State Of ... on 14 June, 2022
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT APPEAL No.744 OF 2017
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated
30.03.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.11381 of 2017.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the
appellant/writ petitioner (Church of South India Trust
Association) came up before the learned Single Judge by filing a
writ petition assailing the action of the respondents/State in
demolishing the premises bearing Bungalow No.223 in Survey
No.492, admeasuring Ac.4.11 guntas, situated at Marredpally,
Secunderabad, as illegal and arbitrary. The learned Single
Judge has dismissed the writ petition, especially in the light of
the fact that a civil suit was filed in respect of the same
property, keeping in view the order dated 08.12.2005 passed by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.7095 of 2002.
The order passed by the learned Single Judge is
reproduced as under:-
"This writ petition is filed assailing the action of the
respondents in demolishing the premises bearing Bungalow
No.223 in Sy.No.492 in land admeasuring Acs.4.11 gts,
situated at Marredpally, Secunderabad as illegal and
arbitrary.
Heard Sri D.Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel
for the petitioner.
A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner had
already approached the Hon'ble Apex Court by filing Civil
Appeal No.7095 of 2002 against the order passed by this
Court in Public Interest Litigation relating to the subject
property in the writ petition. The Hon'ble Apex Court, by
order dated 08.12.2005 set aside the impugned judgment in
Public Interest Litigation and granted liberty to the appellant
therein, who is petitioner herein to file a civil suit within a
period of six weeks from that day.
Sri D.Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel submits
that a comprehensive suit for declaration of title and
injunction i.e., O.S.No.131 of 2006 had been filed on the file
of the I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court,
Secunderabad and the same was dismissed for default and
application for setting aside the same is pending.
When once a comprehensive suit has been filed and
admittedly it is pending, it is for the petitioner to avail his
remedies in the said suit and that he cannot avail two
parallel remedies simultaneously i.e., one by way of suit and
another by way of writ petition. Moreso, first writ petition
filed by petitioner was dismissed on the ground that
questions of title were involved which could not be decided
in summary proceedings under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and that the proper forum to decide
such question was under the jurisdiction of civil court and
as such, petitioner cannot again file present writ petition.
In view of above facts and circumstances, I do not see
any reason to entertain the writ petition and accordingly the
same is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioner to
obtain appropriate orders in the suit before the concerned
civil Court and it is made clear that the Court below shall
dispose of the interlocutory application of the petitioner, on
merits, without being influenced by any of the observations
made in this order.
There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel
thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed."
In the considered opinion of this Court, once a civil suit
was filed before the Court below, the appellant/writ petitioner
was having a remedy to file all kinds of interlocutory
applications in respect of the suit property before the Court
below. Not only this, nothing precluded the appellant/writ
petitioner from filing a civil suit claiming compensation. The
relief claimed in the writ petition can certainly be granted after
appreciation of evidence in the civil proceedings. This Court
does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by
the learned Single Judge.
Resultantly, admission is declined and the writ appeal is
dismissed. The appellant/writ petitioner shall certainly be at a
liberty to approach the Civil Court claiming compensation as
well as other consequential reliefs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
_______________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
14.06.2022
JSU
