The High Court · 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 suspend the operation of order dated 1211112025 passed in W.P. No.31735 of 2025 in so far as the petitioners are concerned, who are not the defendants or respondents in l.A. No.71 of 2021in O.S. No.461 of 2O21on the file of ll Addl. Junior Civil Jud,3e cum ll Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar Counsel for the Appellants: SRl. CHETLURU SREENIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to3: SRI N. SREEDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4to6: SRI MAHESH RAJE, GP FOR HOME The Court madr: the following: JUDGMENT HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO WRIT APPEAL No.1383 OF 20125 DATE OF JUDGMENT 03.12.2025 Betweeen

1. G.V.Pratap Reddy and two others ... appellants/respondent Nos.5 to 7 And

1. Maddhi Divakar Reddy and five others. respondents Mr.Chetluri Sreenivas , learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Mr.N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for tJ:e respondent Nos. I to 3. Mr.Mahesh Raje, the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respqndent Nos.4 to 6. JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)

1. The Writ Appeal arises out of an order dated 12.11.2025 passed by a learned Single Judge by disposing of W.P.No.3 L735 of 2025 liled by the respondent Nos.l arld 2 herein seeking a direction to the respondent No.3/the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgii District (the respondent No.6 herein) to provide police protection for implementing an order dated L6.O6.2O21 passed by the II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-ll Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga lteddy District at L.B. Nagar, in I.A.No.71 of 2o2l in O.S.No..l6l of 2021.

2. Ttre respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein (the plaintiffs) filed the Suit for perpetual injunction. The saicl t.A. was liled for granting; of ad interim injunction to direct the respondent No.3 herein ior restraining the plaintiffs in the Suit (respondent Nos.l and 2 in the writ Appeal) frorn interfering and obstructing the peerceful possr:ssion of the plaintiffs over the petition schedule properties.

3. The appellants herein, who were the respondent Nos.S to 7 the Writ petition, rdrere named in a complaint/representation tiled by the respondent Nos.l and 2/writ cetitioners before the Station House officer, Medipally Police Station, Medchal-Malkajgiri District (the respondent No.3 in the 'writ Petition) on 27.og.2o2s. By the impugned order dated r2.L1.2025, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ Petition granting liberty to the respondent Nos.l and 2lwrit petitioners to submit a representation before the respondent No.3/th.e station House officer, Medipally police Station, along with the order dated 16.06.2021 passed by the Trial court in I.A.No.?'l of 2021 in o.s.No.46l of 2o2r. The learned single Judge further directed that on receipt of the representation, the \ \ respondent No.3/the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, shall take steps for implementation of the order dated

16.06.2021.

4. The appellants/respondent Nos.S to 7 are ag$rieved by the impugned order to the extent that the appellants,were not given notice of the impugned direction as such from the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, even though they were named in the representation dated 27.O9.2025.

5. We do not find substance in the grievance raised by the appellants since the impugned order contains a peremptory direction oh the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, to implement the order dated 16.06.2021 passed by the Trial Court. Paragraph No.6 of the impugned order does reflects any direction of giving any notice issued to the parties whg may be affected, by the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, before taking any steps pursuant to the direction contained in the impugned order.

6. We, hence, deem it fit to direct the respondent No.6/the Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station, to hear all the concerned parties including the appellants and the respondent Nos.l to 3 before taking any steps for implementing the order ,/ "l I I dated 16.06.2021 passed by the Trial court in I.A.No. 7L of 2o2L in o.s.No.461 of 2o2t we are arso aware that sufficient recourse is avairable to the respondent Nos.l and 2/writ petitioners under The code of civil procedure, 1g0g, for implem,:nting the order dated 16.06.2O2I. 7 ' \["A'No. i3g3 of 2o2s, along u,ith alr connected applical.ions, is acc.rdingly disposed of. There shail be no order as to costs. To, /TRUE COPY//

1. The Prirrcipal Secretary to Government Home

2. The Cornmissioner of Police, Rachakonda Co T.S.,Hyierabad. Hyderatrad SD/.V.KAVITHA REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ent at Secretariat, mmissionerate, Neredmet, Hyderabad TOUTI

3. The Station Hogse of Officer, P.S. Medipally, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. 4. Two CCsto GP FOR HOME High Courtfoitne State of Telaigana, at 5. One CC;to SRl. CHETLURU SREENTVAS, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC;to SRl. N. SREEDHAR REDDy, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CEt Copies BM LS \q- / ( THE S r4 ?3 wziin * () * i I : : I t i I I ! I t I I I I I I! I I I I a I I t I ! I I i ; -i I i I : : i I I i i I HIGH COI'RT DATED:03/1 212025 JUDGMEINT WA.No.1383 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS ,\o .,q@ T6'r