The High Court · 2025

Judgment

7. Tfg Rggislrar, Tecial Court under A.P.Land Grabbing, (Prohibition) Act, 1982, llnd Floor, B.R.K.R.Bhavan, Tankbund, Hyderabad. Rafeequnnisa, w/o Basheer, aged about 55 years, Occ: Household, r/o H.No.9-4-876/8/7, MD Lane, Minar Colony, Towlichowki, Hyderabad-8. !-!qmegd Sr!{igui. Sfo. Not known, aged about 58 years, Occ: Employee Rl/o H.No.9-4-8718/6, MD lane, Minar Colony, Towlichowki, Hyderabad-8. Syed Barkhar AIi, s/o Syed Ahammed Ali, aged about 47 years, Occ: Employee, GPA Holder Mahmood Mohiuddin, aged 65 years, r/,c H.No.5-6- 25Bl 1 13, Aghapura, Hyderabad. Ahmgd Al!, S/o. not known, aged about 55 years, Occ: Employee r/o H.No.9- 4-B7lBl2, MD Lane, MinarColony, Towlichowki, Hyderabad-8. - Mohd-Abdul Hakeem, S/o. not known, aged about 60 years, Occ: Employee r/o H.No.9-4-87lB/1, MD Lane, Minar Colony, Towlichowki, Hyderabad. M.A-Salam, S/o. not known, aged about 55 years, Occ: Secretary, The Charminar Co.operative Housing Society r/o H.No.22-1-1014, Nobrkhan Bazar, Hyderabad.

8. C.Shivaji, s/o C.Ramulu, (Since died, as per LRs respondents 9 to 13)

9. Smt. Uma Devi Chandu, Wo late chandu Shivaji, aged about 62 years, Occ Household, Rl/o H.No. 16-3-991/1 1, Officers Colohy, Behind Bibi Cancer Hopital, Malakpet, Hyderaba

10.Sri Raj Kumar Chandu, S/o. late Chandu Shivaji, ageC about 44 years, Occ Business, R/o H.No. 16-3-99'1/'l 1, Officers Colony, Behind Bibi Cancer Hospital, IMalakpet, Hyderabad. '1 l.Ashok Kumar Chandu, S1o,. late Chandu Shivaji, ageri about 39 years, Occ Business, Ri'o H.No. '16-3-991/1 '1, Officers Colony, Behind Bibi Cancer Hospital, Malakpet, Hyderabad. l2.Pradeep Kumar Chandu, S/o. late Chandu Shivaji, age,d about 36 years, Occ Architecl, , [Vo H.No. 16-3-991/1 1, Officers Cotony, Behind Bibi Cincer Hospital, Malakpet, Hyderabad.

13. G. Shivani, D/o. late Chandu Shivaji, aged about 34 )/ears, Occ Household, Rl/o H.No. 16-3-991/1 1, Officers Colony, Behind ilibi Cancer Hospital, Malakpet, Hyderabad. (R9 to 13 were added as parties by order of this honble Court vide order dated 25.'11.2014 in l.A.No.1/2014 (WPMP. No. 24543 ot 20141 (Respondents 2-7 are nol necessary parties) ,..RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 202s Petition under Order 23 rule 3 rlw 151 CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fited in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to order the compromise petition on the above terms and conditions and to close the Review lA.No.2l2O2S (Wp MF,.NO. 29019t2015) in WP.No. 2005812005, in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 2 OF 201S(WPMP. NO: 29019 OF 2015) Petition under Section '1 '14 & Order 47 rule 1 of CpC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to review the judgment in Wp.No. 20058/2005 dated 22.1 .2015, in the interest of justice.

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI N.BHARAT BABU Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel forthe Respondent No.3: SRI V.RAVINDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI KHALID S.eURAISHI Counsel for the Respondent No.7: SRI S.NARSTMHA RAO Gounsel for the Respondent No.9 to 13: SRI M.MEHBOOB ALI The Court made the following: ORDER I , THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTTCE T. VTNOD XUMAR And THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA l.A.No.l af2025 In/and I.A.No.2 of 2015 \YRIT PETITION No.20058 of 2005 ORDER: (P'.,r Hon'ble Stnt. Justice P.Sree Sudha) Petitioner No.1 present. GPA holder of petit oner No.2 is also present, and GPA executed is also filed. Legal representatir, es ol respondent No.8 i.e. wife also present, respondent No.9 to 12 are represented by their GP.A. Holder i.e. respondent l'1o.8, and respondent No.l3 also present. Respective GI'}As are fi l:d

2. Both p:rrties stated that they have entered into compromise when the Revicw petition is pending before this Court a{ter dismissal of the Writ Petition. As per the terms of the Writ Petition, the legal representativcs of respondent No.8 are entitled to retain 120 sq. yards of land and Review petitionels are entitled to 142 sq. yards of land. lt is agreed that the review petitioners and respondent Nos.9 to 13 worrld not interfere with each other's possl:ssion of the land retained by them. Both parties 2 filed a joint memo before the Couft enclosing the compromise deed entered into. The said compromise is recorded. l.A.No.l of 2025 is ordered. ) In terms of compromise entered into between the parties, Review I.A.No.2 of 20i5 is closed. 1 //TRUE COPY// SD/.N. SRIHARI TANT REGISTRAR S SECTION OFFICER ( P ro h i b iti o n ) Act' 13r 5r*r'E*,.,Till2 *?,i'i,f,#:i"; ft ["'? Li,8i3B:[: "'' .2. One CC to SRI N BHARAT BABU' Advocate IOPUC] 3. One CC to SRI M MEHBOOB ALI' Advocate [OPUCI 4. One CC to SRI KHALID S'QURAISHI' Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRI V'RAVINDER RAO' Advocate IOPUC] 6. One CC to SRI S'NARSIMHA RAO' Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE' High Court for the State of Telangana at HYderabad [OUT]

8. Two CD CoPies (Annex the copy of compromise deed) (+' BSR LS l "l I I I I i HIGH COURT 1 DATED: 1010312025 ORDER l.A.No.1 of 2A25 IN/AND l.A.No.2 ot 2A15 IN WRIT PETITION NO: 20058 OF 2005 sstt1 T4 Ie /< ) o I 6 A flP 216 o t f)F P A1 C ORDERING THE l.ANo.I of 2025 & CLOSING THE REV. l.A.No.2 ot 2015 o,ffr,t -.4 4 . - IN THE HIGH COUR.T FOR TTTE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT:I{YDERABAD. I.A.No. of 2025 IA.NO.2 0F 2015 (Rcview WPMP.No.290 19 12015) IN WP.NO. 20058 0F 2005 I Between: l. Farhat Sultana, Wo. Faizuddin, aged about 57 years, Occ: House hold,

2. Billquis Noorain, D/o. Mohd. Abdul Sattar, aged abbdut 42 years. (Both are R/o. H.No.9-4 -87 I 1 / 63, Towlichowki, Hyderabad). AND . . . Petitioners l l l. The Registrar, Special Court under A.it. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, IInd floor, B.R.K.R. Bhavan, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

2. Rafeequnnisa, Wo. Basheer, aged abodut 55 years, Occ: Household, R/o. H.No.9-4-8761B,/7, MD Lane, Minar Colony, Towlichowki, Hyderabad-8.

3. Hameed Siddiqui, S/o. Not known, aged about 58 years, Occ: Employee, R-/o. H.No-9-4-871816, MD Lane, Minar Colony, Towlichowki, Hyderabad-8

4. Syed Bakhar Ali, S/o. Syed Ahammed Ali, aged about 47 years, Occ: Employee, GPA holder Mahrnood Mohiuddin, Aged about 65 years, R/o. Il.No.5 ?<t-r1d.r4r' k'{*gtro r+ -6-258 I I I 8. Ashaoura. Hvderabad. ((-? 'tFj v) {tL I qr*) h G,') CdL->J*1" t A-l\l 1) .-^.i C

5. Ahmed Ali, S/o. Not known, aged about 55 years, Occ: Employee R/o. H.No.9-4.87/B/2, MD Lant: Mippr. Cplony, Tswlichowti, Hydembad-8,

6. Mohd. Abdul Hakeem, S/o. Ngt known, aged about 60 ycars, Occ: Employee, R/o. HNo.9-4-ti7tBll,' MD Lane. Minar Colony, Towlichowki, Hydera:ad.

7. M.A. Salam, S/o. N,ot known, Qged about ' 55 years, Occ: Secretary, The Charminar, Co-operativc Housing Society, R/o. H.No.22- I - I 0 I 4. Noorkhan Bazap,. $yderabl(. 8 Shivaji, S/o. C. Ramulu (Sincc died, as per LRs rcspondgnts 9 to 13)

9. Smt.Urna Devi Chandu, Wo late Chandu Shiv4ji, Agcd abouL 62 years, Occ: Household. tuo H.No. I 6-3 -991 ll l,Officqls colony Behind Bibi Ca4cer Hospitat, Malakpet, Hyderabad t0. Sri.Raj Kumar Chandu, S1o tate Chandu Shivzlji, Aged about 44 years, Occ: Br"ltirless; R/o H.No:16-3'99lllL, Officer's colony behir;d Bibi G-dncer Hospital, Idal.4kpeq Hyderabad Rep by his G,P.ASmt.UmaDe.vi Chandu, \ L$ I l. Sri.Ashok Kumar Chandu, S/o Late Chandu Shivaji, Agcd rrbout 39 years, Occ: Business. R/o H,No. I 6-3 -991/ ll, Officer's colony Behind tlibi Cancer Hospital, Malakpet, Hyder,rbad I 2. Sri Pradcep Kumar Chandu,'S/o Late Chandu lihivaj i, Aged about 36 years, Occ: Architect. R/o I-I.No l6-3 -99llll, Oflicer's colony Behind llibi Cancer Hospitat, Malakpet, Hyderabad

13. G.Shivani, D/o Late Chandu Shivaji, Aged about 34 years, Occ: Household. R/o t':l.No.l6-3 -991111, Offrcer's colony Behind Uibi Cancer Ho @'-'") t{ spital. Mqlqkpet, Hyderabad 4 4'r* z<\qJ e(< 4eut' 6|-1) 'u:nq -@e' )ll ( I ( n-ol c\s\;jir V) f -.5 ,U [Respondents 9 to 13 were ddded as parties by order of - this $enrble court vide'ordet d"atedZS.i t.20t+ in IA.No. U20 I 4(WPMP. 245 43 l20t 4)) (Respondents 2-7 are rtotneces$ry parties) ' ' , . . . . .. ResPondents/ResPondents. JOINT MEMORANDUM OF COMPRO MISE FIL D BY THE RE,VIE W WRIT.PETITIO RS AND iEE RES?ONDENTS 9 TO 13 (LRS OF R-S'I

1. It is submitted that the Charminar Housing society limited purchased land admeasuri"g lj188 &.yds in Sy.No.36711,36712 and 369/1 situate at Shaikpet vitlage and Mandal under registered sale deed dated 12.2.1981. After oBfalning exemption under Section 20 ''--of ULC Act, the society made the land into 7 plots;. The Plot No.4 admeasuring z|z sq.yds:{Iftr initiall -:s.. . purctlaseo by 1 Smt.Rahimunnisa Begum vide sale deed 24.1.1982? That the said Rahimunnisa Begum coirstructed a small buildfrg which was assigned Municipal Door No.9-4-87lB/4. That Ptot No.l was purchased by the Respondent No.6(Abdul Hakeem); Plot No.2 was purchased by the 5th respondent (Ahamed Ali); Ptot No.3 was p.ullaseclly the_!!t'l"jp-oid:nt (Shivaji) Plot No-5 was purchased by the 4th respondent (Baquer Ali); Plot No.6 was purchased by the I I I I I 3rd respond 4 @ ). z<>rtadZVi ---- / -\r G ) I' qsL.vffi-,u ent (Siddique) and Plot No.7 was purchased by the 2nd (a-w)Bq\(h Z4rn"lEr'{ P /-\ C(.14 W -4 fP-d [1qfl*)' "\.. ,} .*.h -f-{ '-:E!.tl?( --'--.. respondent (Rafeequnnisa) Under registered sale deeds. The writ ,:. petitioners are real aisters an{ purphasgd the Hquse,@Iid€ppo.r No. 9-4-87tB/,+ (Plot No.4) from SmtP.Rahimmunisa aeffigfuaring ttr" 't properry [o an extent of 127 Sq.yds and 135 Sq,yds to each of the writ .:,, petitioner.s respectively under rogistered sale'.iltiEl dated 24.1.1996. 'f Th9 3'd plot admeasiring2A5 Sq.ydq was purcha:;ed by Sri. Shivaji under Sale deed dated 20.1 I . 198L

2. It is submitted.that ogt o[7 plots localed ir. onc stretch in the said layou! the pfgt.ownem -r&o first started cc'nstructing houses, . occupied morc than -t[eir entitlement.and constquqtr]d hgUses. Tha!,the i writ petigioners who.puph_asg$ a-*gnstructed house-. plot No;4 adrneasming: 262 sEoyds,. thory!..contain sameerdent of 262 sq-y6, it was alleged by the -81h respondent who is owner of plot no.3 that his land was grabbed by the petitioners to an extent of l2l sq.yds and the owner of I'lo! No.2 to an extent of 124 Sq.yds.

3. It is submitted that instead of getting it surueyed to settle the controversy, the 8s respondent filed land grabbing case i.e., (!-,t LGC.No. 156/1997 against (R,nl rcy l,y q, "1tm-c{eU.r' lt-tn6/qy,[ the unit petitioners and owner of Plot lA' -\ L, G,t L{ .\ l^-L \.1o ts .. _ rtz t:) .a c-,rl I T I *t ) ,)...n No.2. The petitioners filed LGC.No.14511999 complziining against . . all the plot o-wners i.e., l, 2, 5 to 7 stating that they occupied land more than their entitlement resulting in Plot no.3 has been vanished. The Leamed Special court by common Judgement dated'Z|.7.2005, allowed the LGC.No.l56llggrt filed by the' 8th respondent and dismissed LGC -145/lggg nt"a Uy the writ petitioners holding the writ petitioners as Land grabbers to an extent of 121 Sq.yds. I I "'r' 4.' It is submitted that while the matters were pending before the Special cbirrt, the td respondent'Hteied'into comprcimise with owner . 'bf Plot No.2 namely'Ahmed Ali'in respect of 124 sqtrids by accepting t an amount of Rs.2,21,400/- dhdBtecuted a register6'&Saie deed dated

18.7.2003. The The Special court, thus leaving li4 sq.yds out of 245 sq.yds, dealt with extent of t2l sq.yds arid allowed the LGC.No.156/1997 ail dismissed LGC.l45ll999 filed by the petitioners. The common Judgme.nt was assailed by the pctitioners in the writ petition No.20058 of 2005 and this Hon'ble Court granted interim orders of status quo and iiratter was disposed of on 22.1 .2015 without consi 4 ) c' A'rna4ovi dgring the grounds- urged and the legal questions raised QJ-.) tuf 4 4'r* t<yncl ,ltui G-,') CU6\;J."*-' G^c) -rrl G tul- \ qt$' h1 Q,r & a I \ arld hencc, review .Afplication No.29019/2025 rvas hled and this Hon'b]g co,urt granted order of st4tus quo in the said p.plilgo-4. rlfi;

5. It is submitred that the.peritioners and rhe L&S,qf the ge rifspondent i.e., Respondens 9 to 13 at the intei,vention. of the elders an{ well-wishers agreed to settle the maltq rLrnicably under a compromise. As per the compromisp arrived, that out of land admeasuring 262 sq.yds i.e, Plot No.4 of Charminzr Housing society in S.No.367l1, 36712 md 36912 of Shaitpet village and Mandal, the review petitioners aqrqed to rg$i,n 142 sq.yds of land as aganst 262 Sq.yds and the Respondents 9 to 13 LRs ofthe 8th r:spoq{ent agreed to. retain 120sq.yds of, land- B*virtuq githis compromise, rhe other respondcnts 2 tD 7 do qot su,ffi{ aly ;qiury and rnore.sg, they are benefited to the extent which they are in occupption more than their entitlement-

6. In the backdrop ofwhat is stated above, the petitioners and LRs of the 8th contesling respondent, i.e., the Respondents 9 to 13, prays this Hon'ble Court.to dispose of lA.No.2/2015 (Review U-il zr>nqJ Ut (' ro) rr( by q't+ (R a)rrqd ?U4 /,tl4l\ t,' qd\...JgJ' L(-,i) ,e ,t .it , wpMp.No.29;Otgt2o15)' in wp.No.20058l2005 byt.iiedordiilii l0 c-*,-&llowjgg.bompromise terms hrif conditionS: a) That the Review lA.No.2l2025 (WPMP. Nti,29019/2015) petition shalt be closed that the Review petitio 't ' & grabbers. i' nefs are not land b) That out of. larid admeasuring 262:'sq.ydls i.e, Plot No.4 of CharminarHousing:society in S.No.367l1, 36712 and36912 df - Shaikpet viliage and Mandal, the Review petitioners are €--9 entitled to retain 142 sq.yds ol land and the Respondents 9 to l3si.e., l-Rs Of the 8th rdgpifndent'aie. entitled to retain 120 >.-- sq{gg.$+rna. I i ,t:,,t,& c) Thal the LRs of tle 8'h respondent has no righJ whatsoever over 142 Sq.yds of land retained by the Rev6w petitioner in plot No.4 and bbth .-the Review.. petitip-ners and the Respondents 9 to 13 would not interfere with each other's * ' possession ofthe land retained by each other.

7. For the reasons stated above,. it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to order the compromise petition on the above terms and conditions and to close the Review (tt- il atrnqJe I A.N o.2 /2025 (WPMP.No.290 I 9/20 A<-,0) R*-f h,t 4,rtl Zqrnqo{ eLlt. v.t 15) in WP.No.20058/2005, in the f ((-ti) Cr!l*:oy- (o-nt Z (lt ''>) il"L 'qth ;l \ /( interest o1'justice, and pass such other qrder or or<ters as this F.Ion'ble court may deemfit and just. l{yderabad Counsel firr ents 9 to 13 Counsel r.. tt . t#t unde,ai I @-rt

2. 3]!u,tnvi YqqttfA:' w1 (aad / { - JA 2 /'GN Sigrrature of the writ petitioners 3 4 F (*"t) 3, ---'a2 I ,l G^t s -(31;*r., 6-,r) Signature of Respondent 9 to i -. .'*-ltffi '-tr:qqlR'tt?i-'""t -T-'' r '.'. s*;;i2{j111,1g'.