Telangana High Court
Dr. M. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, vs The Assistant Commissioner, on 27 March, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.33 OF 2024
JUDGMENT:
This Appeal is filed aggrieved by the docket order dated
22.12.2023 passed in IA.No.778 of 2023 in OA.No.38 of 2023 on
the file of the Telangana Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal').
2. Heard Sri B.Shiv Ram Sharma, learned counsel for appellant
and Sri Rahul Bhati, learned counsel representing Sri J.R.Manohar
Rao, learned Standing Counsel for Endowments appearing for
respondent No.1.
3. The appellant herein is the respondent and respondents
herein are applicants in the OA before the Tribunal.
4. The facts of the case, in brief, are that respondent Nos.1 and
2 have filed OA.No.38 of 2023 against the appellant before the
Tribunal in respect of land admeasuring 400 square yards in
Sy.No.369 of Attapur Village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga
Reddy District claiming to be the property of Sri Lingayath Road
Wala Mutt-a religious institution and to declare the appellant as
encroacher and consequently, to direct the appellant to remove the
encroachments including structures in the OA schedule property.
LNA, J
5. In the said O.A., it was averred that the subject Mutt is an
ancient institution and the subject Mutt is published and classified
under Section 6(d)(i) of TSCHRI & Endowments Act, 30 of 1987;
that an extent of Acs.23.20 guntas of land situated in various
survey numbers in and around Attapur area within the limits of
GHMC was endowed to the subject Mutt and Occupancy Rights
Certificate was also issued in favour of the subject Mutt vide
proceedings dated 06.011.2003; that mutation was also effected in
revenue records vide proceedings dated 06.09.2016; that the
appellant without any manner of right and title encroached the land
of the subject mutt and raised structures and therefore, the present
OA was filed. Along with the said O.A., an interlocutory
application in IA.No.778 of 2023 was also filed seeking temporary
injunction restraining the appellant, his agents, etc., from
undertaking any construction activity in the OA schedule property;
that the Tribunal vide impugned order had granted ad interim
injunction restraining the appellant from continuing construction in
the OA schedule premises or changing the nature of the OA
schedule property till filing of counter and adjourned the case to
LNA, J
05.01.2023. Aggrieved by the said interim order, the present appeal
is filed.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that in fact, the
wife of the appellant is the owner of the land admeasuring 333
square yards in Plot No.191, Sy.No.369, Attapur Village,
Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased
the same under registered sale deed dated 15.04.2024 bearing
document No.3397/2004 and the plot was regularised under LRS
scheme; that the wife of the appellant has obtained permission for
construction, vide permit dated 29.10.2022, and the construction
was being carried out and at that stage, respondent Nos.1 and 2
filed the OA before the Tribunal along with an application for
ad interim injunction. He further contended that the Tribunal,
without considering the fact that respondents have not filed
sufficient material evidencing their ownership, has erroneously
granted interim order. Learned counsel further contended that
entire area is covered by structures and therefore, the contention of
respondent Nos.1 and 2 that the land endowed to it was encroached
by the appellant is untenable. He further contended that the
appellant is not the owner of the OA schedule property and his wife
LNA, J
is owner of the property, therefore, the OA is bad for non-joinder
of necessary party and finally, he prayed to allow this Appeal.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1 contended
that large extents of land, which includes Sy.No.369, are all land
belonging to subject Mutt; that ORC has also been issued in favour
of the subject Mutt and mutation was also effected in proof of
ownership of the subject Mutt. He further contended that along
with the OA, the respondents have filed Sethwar which clearly
show that the subject Mutt is owner of vast extents of land in
Attapur Village, including the OA schedule property. He further
contended that the Tribunal, duly taking into consideration the
material placed on record and also the contentions of the
respondents, has rightly passed the interim order restraining the
appellant from continuing construction in the OA schedule
premises or changing the nature of the OA schedule property. He
further contended that no illegality or irregularity is pointed out in
the impugned order warranting interference by this Court and thus,
the Appeal, being devoid of merits, is liable to be dismissed.
8. Perusal of the impugned order would show that the Tribunal
has passed interim order restraining the appellant from continuing
LNA, J
construction in the OA schedule premises or changing the nature of
the OA schedule property till the filing of the counter and
adjourned the case to 05.01.2023. The appellant instead of filing a
counter before the trial Court and contesting the matter, has
preferred the present CMA.
9. Today, at the hearing, learned counsel for the respondents
reported that the appellant has not yet filed counter in the aforesaid
IA before the trial Court.
10. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,
in the considered opinion of this Court, the appellant can take all
the defences or grounds which are now being taken in this appeal
and contest the matter by filing a counter, by duly placing all the
material and documents to substantiate his contentions. In the
impugned order, the Tribunal specifically observed that interim
order was granted only till filing of counter, therefore, obviously,
no prejudice would have been caused to the appellant had he
contested the IA by filing counter and contested the matter.
11. Accordingly, this Appeal is disposed of and the appellant is
directed to file counter, if any, in I.A.No.778 of 2023 within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
LNA, J
and the Tribunal shall dispose of the said IA on its own merits,
after duly affording opportunity of hearing to both the parties, as
early as possible.
12. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
No costs.
___________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Date:27.03.2025
dr
