The High Court · 2025

3. Paynala Shekaraiah @ Shekar, S/o Late Mallaiah, aged about 70 years, Occ. Retd.Employee, R/o.1 -7-1 550, Srinivas Nagar, Balasamudram, Hanamkonda Warangal Telangana State ...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 issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction in the nature of a Writ declaring Pattadar Pahani Copy bearing No. TSVSAA 56171845 dated 04-04-20189 issued by the 2nd respondent reflecting the name ofthe 3rd respondent as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of lndia and principles of natural justice and consequently set side the same in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 I t suspend the Pattadar Pahani Copy bearing No. TSVSAA 56171845 dated 04-04- 20189 issued by the 2nd respondent pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 receive the documents viz., (1\ Copy of Judgement and Decree in OS No 659 of 2010, dt 2210312018 on the file of the Court of l- Addl Senior Civil Judge at Warangal (2) Copy of order passe din lA No 1 of 2018 in A.S No 1238 of 2018, dt 3011012018 (3) Copy of representation dt 07/06/2018. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI B.NALIN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.3 : M/s.VANAM VISHWANATHAM The Court made'the following: ORDER THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.7637 of 2OL9 ORDER: Heard iearned counsel appearing for the petitioner, iearned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for the respondent Nos.l and 2 and learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and perused the material on record. d'

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that father of the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.5.01 guntas in Sy.No.454 situated at Bandimetta Shivar (Bodagutta), Munipalli Village, Hasanparthy Mandal, Warangai District. By virtue of Gift Settlement Deed bearing document No.7l24l2OO8, dated 30.12.2OO8, the petitioner has become the owner of the above said property. While it being so, the respondent Nc.3, who is the bother-in-law of the petitioner has filed O.S.No.659 of 2010 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, for declaration of t.r.re title and perpetual I I I 2 SIi. J \\,.P 7637 2019 1nJ rrnctlon 1n respect of the suit schedule property. Thereafter, the Trial Court decreed and partly dismissed the O.S.No.659 of 201O on 22.03.2018 against the defendants therein by granting permanent injunction restraining the defendants therein from interfering into the possession and enjoyment of the ptaintilf over the suit scheduled property. Aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court in O.S.No.659 of 2010 dated 22.O3.2018, the petitioner has filed A.S.No. 12138 of 2018 before this Court.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondent No.2 herein has entered the name of the respondent No.3 in the revenue record without issuing any notice to the petitioner, while the A.S.No.12138 ol 2018 is pending before this Court. In view of the same, the petitioner herein has submitted representations dated 17.O7.2O\8 and 26.07.2O18 to the respondent No.2 with regard to the pendency of the litigation between the contesting parties. Despite, the respondent No.2 has issued impugned Pahani dated 3 SK, J w.P_?637 2019

04.O4.2019 without issuing any notice to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.2, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition and requested to allow the sa-rne by setting aside the Pattadar Pahani bearing No.TSVSAA 5617i845, dated

04.O4.2019 issued by the respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3, basing on the counter, submits that this Court has dismissed the I.A.No.1 of 2018 in A.S.No.1238 of 2018 for suspension of Decree and Judgment in O.S.No.659 of 2010 dated 22.03.2018 on 3O.10.2018. In view of dismissal ol LA.No.1 of 2018 in A.S.No.1238 of 2018, there is no impediment for the respondent No.2 for considering the request of the respondent No.3. Moreover, by following the provisions of ROR Act and the Trial Court orders 1n O.S.No.659 of 2O1O dated

22.03.2018, the respondent No.2 herein considered the application dated 07.06.2018 filed by the respondent No.3 and issued Pattadar Pahani bearing No.TSVSAA / 4 SI\, .l \\-.P_:6:11 20 t9 56171845, dated 04.04.2O19 and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

5. After hearing both sides and on perusing the entire material on record, this Court is of the considered view that there is a civil dispute betrveen the petitioner ald the respondent No.3 for the suit schedule property. In respect of the dispute, the respondent No.3 has filed O.S.No.659 of 2010 on the file of the I Additionai Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, for declaration of title and the sarne was partly allowed on 22.03.2018. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner {iled A.S.No.7213a of 2018 before this Court and the same is still pending. As per the Revenue Records, it clearly shows that till the year, 2078, the petitioner nalne was shown as Pattadar in Form I-B Model (ROR) with Katha No.7O8 for the land admeasuring to afl extent of Ac.5.O1 guntas 1n Sy.No.454 situated at Bandimetta Shivar (Bodagutta), Munipalli Village, Hasanparthy Mandal, Warangal District. Thereafter, without any proceedings, the \ respondent authorities issued impugned Pahani for the 7 5 SI(' J w.P 7637 20 19 same survey nurnber in the name of the respondent No.3. It clearly shows in the impugned Pattadar Pa-hali, dated 04.04.2O79.

6. The petitioner herein questioning the action of the respondents without following due process or without issuing any notice to the petitioner issued impugned Pahani dated O4.04.2019 and mutated the narne of the respondent No.3 as pattadar and d' possesslon.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for the officia,l respondents failed to produce or show the proceedings or notice issued to the petitioner before mutating the name of the respondent No.3 in Pahani/ Adzrngal.

8. In view of the submissions made by the both I sides, this Court feels it fit and appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by setting aside the Pattadar Pahani bearing No.TSVSAA 56L7 1845, dated 04.04.20 19 issued- 5 SI{,.I v.P_7637_20 t9 by the respondent No.2 on the ground that without issuing notice to the petitioner, the respondent authorities mutated the name of the respondent No.3 in the Pattadar Pahani.

9. In view of the above circumstances, the writ petition 1S disposed of by setting aside the Pattadar Pahani bearing No.TSVSAA 56 17 1845, dated 04.O4.2O 19 issued by the respondent No.2 and remands the matter {," back to the Tahsildar, Hasanparthy a-r-rd further directed to dispose the matter by giving equa,l opportunity to the petitioner as well as the unofficial rcspondent by following due procedure. However, there shall be no order as to costs

10. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall a-lso stancl closed. SD/.T, JAY ASSISTANT REGI REE TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER l$Hi'F,':#ii*llt"ttt*?"E,Tl*],.-L.,,::ffi l:':'T'"'I"l'luu'o l i*: li:j".SBi?. 8AS$Hff H ff n"$Ift t8lH"crst't" or r" r u ns' n' , 8"'S" to M/s.VANAM vIsHWANATHAM' Advocate toPUCl 6. Two CD CoPies' BSK BS (fr-' \ To, / HIGH COURT DATE D : 1 810212025 e:'t I I ORDER WP.No.7637 ot 2019 l|lE S T4 16. o a. (: O3 ilPR zffi * Cr.. 4'l/ * ,.?' .;,- ;:r), i L., rr':ti DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS (l- i{*\"r