Akther Zahida vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 827 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

                              AND

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


               WRIT APPEAL No.205 of 2023


JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)


      Heard Ms. Asra Khanam, learned counsel for the

appellants; Mr. M.Roopender, learned Government Pleader

for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 5; Mr. Praveen Kumar

Veerjala, learned Standing Counsel for Greater Hyderabad

Municipal Corporation (GHMC) for respondent No.6; and

Mr. Suresh Shiv Sagar, learned counsel for respondent

Nos.7 & 8.

2. This intra-court appeal is directed against the

order dated 07.02.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge

declining to interfere in Writ Petition No.552 of 2023 filed by

the appellants.

3. Appellants had filed the related writ petition

seeking a direction to respondent Nos.3 to 6 not to interfere 2 HCJ & NTRJ W.A.No.205 of 2023

in the peaceful possession and enjoyment of house bearing

Municipal Nos.18-1-544/1/A/8, 18-1-544/1/A/9, 18-1-

544/1/A/10, 18-1-544/1/A/11, 18-1-544/1/A/12 and 18-

1-544/1/A/13 on part of Plot Nos.6 to 13, in Survey No.93

totally admeasuring 1650 square yards or 1379.56 square

meters of appellant Nos.2 to 7 and remaining extent of 250

square yards vide Municipal House bearing No.18-1-

544/1/A/14 on Plot No.14 in Survey No.93 of appellant

No.1, situated at Kandikal Gate Village, Bandlaguda

Mandal, Hyderabad (briefly referred to hereinafter as 'the

subject property).

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

learned Single Judge did not refer to the submissions of

learned counsel for the appellants and merely on the basis

of the submissions of the learned Assistant Government

Pleader for Home and respondent Nos.7 & 8 declined to

interfere.

5. From a perusal of the order dated 07.02.2023,

we find that according to learned Assistant Government 3 HCJ & NTRJ W.A.No.205 of 2023

Pleader for Home, 2nd appellant had lodged a private

complaint with regard to the subject property on the basis

of which Crime No.406 of 2022 was registered by

Chatrinaka Police Station under Sections 467, 468 and 420

of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) read with Section 34

thereof. In the course of investigation, the Investigating

Officer had visited the subject property. Thereafter notice

was issued to the complainant i.e., appellant No.2 for

recording of statement. Simultaneously, notice under

Section 41-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

(Cr.P.C) was issued to the accused persons.

6. On the other hand, on behalf of respondent

Nos.7 & 8, it was submitted before the learned Single Judge

that appellants have filed a suit being O.S.No.16 of 2023 on

the file of X Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court,

Hyderabad which is pending as regards the subject property

against respondent Nos.7 and 8 who have been arrayed as

defendants.

                                4                  HCJ & NTRJ
                                            W.A.No.205 of 2023

7. In the light of the above submissions, learned

Single Judge took the view that no orders were called for.

Since the writ petition raised disputed questions of fact

pertaining to the subject property which is being considered

in O.S.No.16 of 2023, he declined to make any observations

lest such observations be misconstrued while adjudicating

O.S.No.16 of 2023.

8. We feel that learned Single Judge had adopted

the correct approach while deciding the case. That apart, it

is open to the appellants to seek injunction in O.S.No.16 of

2023 to restrain the defendants from interfering with the

possession and enjoyment of the subject property by the

appellants.

9. In such circumstances, we do not find any good

reason to entertain the writ appeal.

10. Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. However,

there shall be no order as to costs.

                                5                    HCJ & NTRJ
                                              W.A.No.205 of 2023

11. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending,

if any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.

12. Later on, learned counsel for the appellants

appears and makes a prayer for withdrawal of the writ

appeal.

13. We are afraid having dictated the entirety of the

order in open Court, it is not permissible for the Court to

recall the said order.

_______________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ

_______________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J Date: 17.02.2023 KL