Saturday, 18, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

B.Seetharam vs The State Of Telangana And 7 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5841 Tel

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5841 Tel
Judgement Date : 15 November, 2022

Telangana High Court
B.Seetharam vs The State Of Telangana And 7 Others on 15 November, 2022
Bench: B.Vijaysen Reddy
        HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

       WRIT PETITION Nos.15398 AND 17918 OF 2020

COMMON ORDER (ORAL):

       As the subject matter is similar and respondent Nos.6 to 8

are same in both the writ petitions, they are taken up for disposal

together.

2. These writ petitions are filed aggrieved by inaction of

respondent No.5 - the Station House Officer, Chaitanyapuri Police

Station, Chaitanyapuri, Hyderabad, in providing police protection

to the respective petitioners against respondent Nos.6 to 8 pursuant

to their complaint dated 10.02.2020 based on the judgment and

decree in O.S. Nos.195 and 196 of 2003 both dated 03.06.2006

passed by the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy

District.

3. It is not in dispute that in the above suits, decree for

perpetual injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiffs i.e., the

petitioners herein against the defendants viz., Jangala Gandaiah

and his four sons - unofficial respondent Nos.6 to 8 herein,

declaring the petitioners viz., P.Raghotham Reddy and B.

Seetharam as owners of subject Plot Nos.17 and 18 respectively

and restrained unofficial respondent Nos.6 to 8 from interfering

with possession and enjoyment of the petitioners on those plots.

4. Heard Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the

petitioner in W.P. No.15398 of 2020, Mr. D. Jagan Mohan Reddy,

learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 8 in both the writ petitions,

and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, and perused

the material on record.

5. Mr. T.V. Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner in

W.P.No.17918 of 2020 is not present.

6. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.6 to 8 has

submitted that Execution Petition Nos.51 of 2017 filed by the

petitioner in the latter writ petition before the trial Court for

execution of decree passed in O.S. No.196 of 2003 is pending

along with the application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil

Procedure 1908 (CPC) for providing police protection. While E.P.

No.51 of 2017 filed by the petitioner along with the application

under Section 151 of CPC is pending, invoking jurisdiction of this

Court cannot be permitted to agitate the same grievance. It is

further submitted that in W.P. No.15398 of 2020, the petitioner

ought to have availed effective alternate remedy under the

competent civil Court by filing execution petition or application

under Section 151 of CPC for police protection. Instead, the

petitioner has directly approached this Court.

7. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner in W.P.

No.17918 of 2020 cannot be permitted to pursue the writ petition

since he has already availed alternate remedy by filing E.P. No.51

of 2017 and application for grant of police aid. In W.P. No.15398

of 2020, it is not known whether execution petition is filed to

implement the decree in O.S. No.195 of 2003. The petitioner, in

any case, has not pleaded any exceptional circumstances to

approach this Court directly for grant of police aid without

resorting to alternate remedy under the CPC.

8. In the above facts and circumstances, in W.P. No.17918

of 2020, the trial Court is directed to pass orders in E.P. No.51 of

2017 or any application filed under Section 151 of CPC for grant

of police aid for implementing the decree dated 03.06.2006 in

O.S. Nos.196 of 2003 within a period of two (2) months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner in

W.P. No.15398 of 2020 is at liberty to file execution petition or

application under Section 151 of CPC for implementing the decree

dated 03.06.2006 in O.S. No.195 of 2003. It is needless to mention

that respondent Nos.6 to 8 - judgments debtors shall be given

opportunity to file counter and contest the Execution Petitions and

applications, if any, in both the writ petitions.

9. With the above directions and observations, both the writ

petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,

pending in these writ petitions stand closed.

______________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J November 15, 2022.

PV

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter