Addanki Narsamma v. District
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue Writ order or direction moreparticualrly one in thenature of Writ of Mandamus, declaringthe action of the respondents in not conducting the survey in respect of the land admeasurng Ac. 0-39 gts., and ac. 0-06 3/4 gts. situted in Sy. No. 737/2.2 and 738/1 of Kodad Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District and fixing the boundary stones pursuant to the applications dt 16-1-2008 and 16-6-2008 respectively submitted by the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to conduct the survey and fix the boundaries, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper inthe circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.PALLENAGESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO.14689 OF 2008
ORAL ORDER:
The petitioner states that her husband was the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Ac.19.02 guntas in Survey No.737/2.2 and 738/1 of Kodad Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District, out of which he sold most of the land and retained an extent of Ac.0.39 guntas and Ac.0.06 ¾ gutnas and after his demise, she succeeded to the same and is in continuous and uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the land in question and also got mutated her name in the relevant revenue records. The main grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that she made applications on 16.01.2008 and
Operative part
16.06.2008 to the third respondent-Tahsildar, Kodad Mandal, Nalgonda District, requesting him to conduct survey of the land in question and fix the boundary stones thereon, but no action had been taken thereon so far. Hence, she filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue, and both of them agreed for disposal of the writ petition at the stage of admission with the following directions: The third respondent, namely, the Tahsildar, Kodad Mandal, Nalgonda District, is directed to consider and dispose of the applications dated 16.01.2008 and 16.06.2008 of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law and take necessary action for conducting survey of the land in question and fix the boundary stones thereon, expeditiously. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Date: 09.07.2008 VGSR ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 09 Jul 2008. The bench was N V RAMANA.
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.