High Court · 2025

9. Smt. Shobha Vasanth, D/o K. Janardhanan Pillai, Aged about 66 Years, Occ Housewife, Rl/o 4 A, Skyline Royale, Panampalli Nagar, Eranakulam, Kerala State- 682036. l0.Sreedevi G Nair, D/o R. Gopinathan Nair, Aged about 29 Years, Occ Housewife, Ri/o Sreeranjini ,TC 241288(1), Ti- aycaud P. O. , Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala State- 695014, lndia.

11.Ashok Kumar Sugandhi, S/o Late Kantilal Aged about 55 Years, H. No. 3- 6- 128, Hyderguda, Street No. '14, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad- 500029. l2.Ashwini Kumar Sugandhi, S/o Late Kantilal, H. No. 8- 2- 29318214,192, Road No. 14, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad- 500032. .

13.Meera Sugandhi, D/o Late Kantilal, H. No. 22- 5- 191, GulzarHouz, Hyderabad- 500002.

14.Sunita Sugandhi, D/o Late Kantilal, H. No. 22- 5- 191, GulzarHouz, Hyderabad- 500002. -7

15. Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC), Reoresented bv its Commissioner, circle -11 Rajendri Nagar, Ranga ReOdy District.

16. Hyderabad Metroporitan Deveropmenthuthoriti(HMDAi, Represented by its Commissioner, Swarna. Jayanti Complex, Sanjebva Reddy Nagar, Sriniv'asa Nagar, Ameerpet, Hyderabid _ 500038. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to lssue a writ of Mandamus (a) Directing the Respondent No.3 to declare the sale Deeds Nos. 9390/ '1994, 939i/i994 and g774t1gg4 as void ab- initio which was obtained fraudulenfly through forged and fabricated documents and (b) To declare the settlement dated 03. 05. 2024 between Respondent Nos. 11 to 14 and Respondent Nos. 7 & B Bank as void, collusive and not binding on the Petitioners and (c) To declare that Respondent Nos.7 and B Bank, against which the civil court explicitly declined jurisdiction, could neither have relied upon nor executed the observations in the 200s judgment after i 9 years, particularly when the civil court held it had no jurisdiction over the Bank, no decree was passed against the Bank, the observations were not executable after .12 years under the Limitation Act, the Bank was bound by RDDB Act procedures, and DRT proceedings were pending and (d) To direct the Banks to recover dues through prescribed procedure under RDDB Act cannot be circumvented or waived based on observations in a time- barred civil court order passed without jurisdiction qua the Bank and the Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 Bank had a statutory duty to fetch the highest possible value for the mortgaged properties through public auction process and (e) Direct that any proceeds from sale of mortgaged properties exceeding the loan amount due to the Bank shall be returned to the petitioners who are the original land owners and owners of the properties and the Bank to account for the exponential appreciation in property value from 2005 to 2024 and declare that private settlement ignoring such appreciation is arbitrary and illegal and (f) To direct cancellation of No- Dues certificate dated 30. 04. 2024, closure certificate dated 03' 05. 2024 issued by Respondent No. 3 (Bank) and (g) To direct Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 Bank to continue DRT proceedings in o. A No. 9/ 199g in DRC No '1 '1512001 pending before the Hon'ble DRT, Kerala restore status quo ante as on 27.o3.2024, take possession of properties, and proceed with recovery through public auction as per law. 3 lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou( may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 to initiate effective steps in accordance with the law to stop the illegal, unauthorized constructions carried out by the Respondent Nos.9 to 14 in respect schedule land into an extent of lands measuring 20 guntas land each petitioner have undivided share and 7 Acre 34 Guntas as divided share in Survey Numbers 46, 53, 54, 55 and 56/2 situated at Premavathipet Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, till the disposal of the Writ Petition, in the interest of justice. 1A NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 not to entertain registration and mutation of the scheduled land to create multiplicity of litigation till the disposal of the Writ Petition, in the interest of justice. lA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the developmental agency i.e., Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) and Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) etc., not to accord any development permission for carrying development activity over the scheduled land to create multiplicity of litigation till the disposal of the Writ Petition, in the interest of justice. lA NO: 4 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay the operation and implementation of settlement dated 03.05.2024 between Respondent Nos.11 to '14 and Respondent Nos.7 & 8 Bank, No-Dues Certificate dated 30.04.2024, and Closure Certificate dated 03.05.2024 ovet the scheduled lr- land to create multiplicity of litigation till the disposal of the Writ Petition, in the interest of iustice. lA NO: 5 OF 2025 Pelition under Section '151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to not to alienate and restrain the Respondents and his men, agents from interfering with the peaceful and possession and enjoyment of the petitioners over the scheduled land to create multiplicity of litigation till the disposal of the Writ Petition, in the interest of justice. Counsel Counsel Counsel Counsel Cou nsel for the for the for the for the for the Petitioners: SRI GURRAM HARI KUMAR Respondent Nos.1 TO 6: GP FOR REVENUE Respondent No.15: SRI R.VENKATESH, GOUD Respondent No.16: SRI V.NARSIMHA GOUD Respondent Nos.7 TO 14: - The Court made the following: ORDER w / HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITIoN No.l431 OF'2025 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) after arguing at length seeks permission of this Court to rvithdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file a fresh writ petition by filing lelevant property papers

2. In view of the above submission, this writ petition 1S dismissed as withdrawn grantir-rg liberty AS sought for. No costs. Miscellareous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stancl clcsed To //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR / ECTION OFFIGER Hyderabad. [OUTI

1. One CC to SRI GURRAM HARI KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the'State oi Tetangana, at 3. One CC to SRI R.VENKATESH, GOUD, Advocate tOpUCl 4. One CC to SRI V.NARSIMHA GOUD, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies PSK. BS b HIGH COURT DATED:1 010212025 ORDER WP.No.1431 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETTTION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS @^"u ( ,q :() ,.) + 1iif S lii 01 t'l[H M ,'.\a\ ,.1 tr-ll,'*, - -.', ,-r-' -- \=-- -