Telangana High Court
Gankidi Damoder Reddy vs The State Of Telangana on 11 September, 2025
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.670 of 2024
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Sri G.L.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the
petitioner; Mr.L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and
Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar, learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.6.
2. A perusal of the record would reveal that respondent No.6
has filed a suit in O.S.No. 343 of 2010 on the file of the Principal
Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, against the petitioner seeking
perpetual injunction in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.3-00
guntas in Sy.No.1913/B, situated at Madikonda Village,
Hanumakonda Mandal, Warangal District.
3. The petitioner is claiming ownership of the land
admeasuring Ac.0-29 guntas in Sy.No.1912/E; Ac.8-00 guntas in
Sy.No.1913/B; and Ac.2-30 guntas in Sy.No.1914/B, total
admeasuring Ac.11-19 guntas, situated at Madikonda Village,
Hanumakonda Mandal, Warangal District. In proof of the same,
he has filed copies of the latest passbook and title deeds. He has
also filed a counter claim in respect of the said land in
O.S.No.343 of 2010. Vide judgment dated 01.04.2021, the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, decreed the said
suit and dismissed the counterclaim. Aggrieved by the said
judgment, the petitioner filed first appeals, vide A.S.Nos.269 and
296 of 2022.
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
said appeals were transferred to two different Courts on the
ground of jurisdiction. The petitioner has also filed interlocutory
applications in the said appeals, which are currently pending.
During the pendency of the appeals and the interlocutory
applications, respondent No.6 is trying to mutate his name in the
revenue records with the help of respondent Nos.3 to 5.
Therefore, the petitioner issued a legal notice dated 17.10.2023
to respondent No.5 with a request not to entertain any
application submitted by respondent No.6 for mutation or
issuance of a pattadar passbook in respect of the subject property
during the pendency of the aforesaid appeals. Despite receiving
and acknowledging the said legal notice, respondent No.5 did
not act upon the same. Aggrieved by the said inaction of
respondent No.5, the present writ petition is filed.
5. As discussed supra, the aforesaid two appeals and the
interlocutory applications filed by the petitioner are admittedly
pending before the trial Court. During the pendency of these
appeals and the interlocutory applications, the petitioner cannot
issue a legal notice to respondent No.5 and file the present writ
petition alleging non-consideration of the said legal notice. The
petitioners have to pursue the said interlocutory applications and
appeals, upon obtaining appropriate orders, he has to approach
respondent Nos.3 to 5, for implementation of such orders.
6. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is
disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue the
interlocutory applications filed by him in A.S.Nos.269 and 296
of 2022, as well as the appeals themselves, and on obtaining
orders, he shall approach respondent Nos.3 to 5 with a request to
implement the said orders. On filing such applications,
respondent Nos.3 to 5 shall consider and dispose the same in
accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
_____________________
K. LAKSHMAN, J
11.09.2025
sa
