Telangana High Court
M/S.Madhuban Enterprises vs State Of Telangana on 18 March, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.8281 of 2024
ORDER:
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, is filed seeking the following relief:
"....to issue Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the
nature of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the Respondents No.1 to 6
to issue a notice, to hear the Petitioner, before according any
Building permission, Layout Permissions, Conversion of the Land
from agriculture to non-agriculture in respect of the Land
admeasuring 30 Acres out of land survey Nos.104/1, 105/1,
106/1, 107/1, 108/1, 109/1 and 113/1 situated at Puppalaguda
Village, Gandipet Mandal, Rangareddy District, in favour of
Respondents No.7 to 10 or any third parties. Consequently declare
the inaction of the Respondents No.1 to 6 for non-communication
to the Representations made by the Petitioner dated 19-02-2024 is
illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Law and fundamental Rights
guaranteed under the constitution...."
2. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the
respective parties and perused the record.
3. It is stated that originally, Azeemuddin S/o. Aleemuddin
was the absolute owner of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.37-
15 gts in Sy.Nos.104/1, 105/1, 106/1, 107/1, 108/1, 109/1
and 113/1 situated at Puppalaguda Village, Gandipet Mandal,
Ranga Reddy District, by virtue of 38-E patta certificate granted
by the Additional Revenue Divisional Officer, Hyderabad vide
Proceedings No.LRW/155/1975 dated 29.08.1975. It is further
stated that said Azeemuddin and others sold aforesaid lands to
the petitioner under agreement of sale dated 30.07.1994 but
failed to execute registered sale deed, which constrained the
petitioner to file a suit for specific performance vide O.S.No.615
of 1996 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy
District and the same was decreed vide judgment dated
09.09.2004. It is further stated that seeking execution of the said
judgment, the petitioner has filed Execution Petition and the
same is pending. It is also stated that the petitioner has entered
into agreement of sale-cum-General Power of Attorney in favour
of M/s.Kaisar and Associates, a partnership firm vide document
No.4092/2007 dated 06.03.2007 for developing the land
admeasuring Ac.30-00 gts out of total land admeasuring Ac.37-
15 gts. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent Nos.7 to 10
without having any manner of right, are making attempts to
obtain permissions i.e, building permission, layout clearance,
conversion certificate from respondent Nos.1 to 6 claiming the
subject lands admeasuring Ac.30-00 gts. The grievance of the
petitioner is that it has submitted representations dated
19.02.2024 to the official respondents requesting not to grant
any permission to the unofficial respondents in respect of the
subject lands, till date, no action has been taken.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
when the respondent Nos.7 to 10 in collusion with third parties
tried to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the
petitioner over the subject lands and encroach the same, the
petitioner was constrained to institute a suit vide O.S.No.38 of
2024 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy
District, at Rajendranagar and the same is pending for
adjudication.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.7 to
9 has submitted that a decree for specific performance is not
equivalent to transfer of title. Until a sale deed is executed and
registered, the title of the property remains with the seller.
Therefore, the petitioner being only an alleged agreement holder,
cannot claim ownership or title over the subject lands. It is
further submitted that earlier, the petitioner instituted a suit
vide O.S.No.2994 of 2019 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil
Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar, seeking declaration
and consequential injunction. However, on the application vide
I.A.No.175 of 2022 filed by the respondent No.9 herein, the said
Court vide order dated 07.11.2022 rejected the plaint for non-
disclosure of cause action and barred by limitation. The learned
counsel submitted that the respondent Nos.7, 8 and 9 are the
owners and possessors of the subject lands admeasuring Ac.9-12
gts having purchased the same under registered sale deeds
bearing document Nos.15115, 15116, 8182, 8835 and 8836 of
2006. It is further submitted that in E.P.No.5 of 2007 pending on
the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, the
respondent No.9 herein has filed E.A.No.175 of 2019 and the
same is pending for adjudication.
6. From the above submissions, it is seen that there are
serious disputes between the parties with regard to the right,
title and possession of the subject lands. Admittedly, the E.P.No.5
of 2007 filed by the petitioner seeking to execute the judgment and
decree dated 09.09.2004 passed in O.S.No.615 of 1996 by learned
Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, is pending
and the respondent No.9 is contesting the said E.P. In the
absence of any registered sale deed executed in favour of
petitioner, it has no legal stand to challenge the action of the
respondents in relation to land use permissions, conversions, or
any other rights associated with the subject property. In case,
any registered sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner in
respect of subject property, it is entitled to make an appropriate
application on the file of respondents and object for conversion of
the subject land from agricultural use to non-agricultural use or
for grant of building permissions, in accordance with law.
7. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed
of. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,
shall stand closed.
__________________________
C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J
Date: 18.03.2025
scs
