Andhra Pradesh High Court · 2005
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
WRIT PETITION NO : 10893 of 2005 Between: 1 Vasipalli Venkamma, D/o Paradesi, R/o Mutyalammapalem, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Vasipalli Gurayya, S/o Paradesi, Hindu, R/o Mutyalammapalem, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 3 Titti Rajayya, S/o Appanna, Hindu. R/o Dibbapalem H/o Cheepurupalli, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4 Bondu Maseenu, S/o Gangulu, Hindu, R/o Dibbapalem H/o Cheepurupalli, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. AND ..... PETITIONERS
1 The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam. 2 Assistant Commissioner of Police, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District. 3 The Station House Officer, Paravada Police Station, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4 Kannuru Appanna, S/o Appanna, Hindu, R/o Naidupalem, H/o Cheepurupalli, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 5 Reddi Satyanarayana, S/o Appanna, Hindu, R/o Naidupalem, H/o Cheepurupalli, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 6 Reddi Appanna, S/o Appadu, Hindu, R/o Naidupalem, H/o Cheepurupalli, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. .....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the 4th respondent and others is not merely a civil dispute hence direct the respondents 1 to 3 to prevent damage to person and the property of the petitioners in Sy.No. 321 of an extent of 24 acres situated at Tikkavanipalem Village, Cheepurupalli Revenue, Paravada Mandal and maintain peace and tranquility and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.P.SRI RAGHU RAM Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME The Court, at the admission stage, made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
The learned counsel for the petitioners wants to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition. Ordered as prayed for. Date: 03.05.2005 Nsr/Svv ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam. 2 Assistant Commissioner of Police, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District. 3 The Station House Officer, Paravada Police Station, Paravada Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. 4 Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 5 Two CD copies
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 03 May 2005. The bench was GODA RAGHURAM.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.