Ponnam Laxmi v. '1 . The State of Telangana

8. Kotha Sridevi, D/o. Late Narayana Reddy, aged 46 years, occ Housewife, r/o H.No. 2-10-189, Jyothinagar, Karimnagar locality.

9. Kamibathula Venkateswarlu, S/o Mallaiah, aged z16 years, occ Tax Consultant, Fl/o.H.No. 5-4-33 Ganeshnagar, Karimnagar. Locality. 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in .....RESPONDENTS the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 'espondent No. 3 herein in causing his interference in the civil disputes perr ling between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in O.S.No. I 86 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar wherein r terim iniunction is subsisting in l.A.No. 786 of 2015 dt. 18-2-20'1 5 and threaten r g to withdraw the suit and to handover the suit property to the unofficial reslr,,ndents, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. I.A.NO:1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 33127 OF 2016 ) Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirt umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Cor 1 may be pleased to pass orders directing the Respondent No.3 herein not to call the petitioner and her husband to the police station or in any manner interfere wit r the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the unofficial responc ( nts including the personal life and liberty of the petitioner, pending disposz I of the main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI N.HARI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : SRI R.LAXMIKANTI-I IEDDY, AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 9 : Ms. R.MADHAVI LAT {A, ADVOCATE FOR SRI NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA The Court made the following ORDER :::u i:': n" ,.n' THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITIO N No. 26755 OF 2016 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief "- . .fo lssue an appropiate Writ, Order or Direction, more particutafly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaing the action of the respondent No. 3 herein in causing his inbrterence in the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the urafficial respondent Nos. 4 to 6 ,n O.S. No. 286 of 2015 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Karimnagar, wherein interim injunction ls subsr'strng in t.A. No 786 of 2015 dt. 18-2-2015 and threatening to withdraw the suit and to handover the suit prope@ to the unofficial respondents, as being illegal, afiitrary aN unconstitutionat, and to granl such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R' Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home' appearing for respondent Nos. '1 to 3 and Ms. R Madhavi Latha, learned counsel, representing Mr. Nimmagadda Satyana-ayana, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4 to 9.

3. Learned counsel for the petrtioner submits that respondent No' 3 interfered in the civil dispute pending between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents in respect of the suit schedule property. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached this Court by f,rling the present writ 2 petition seeking appropriate directions. Upon cons deration of the submissions, this Court, by order dated 11.09.2016, r; anted an interim direction restraining respondent No. 3 from interferi rg with the civil dispute and from threatening the petitioner to withdralv the pending civil suit. The said interim direction has effectively redressec the grievance of the petitioner. 4. The learned Assistant Government preader for Home, however, submits that respondent No. 3 never interfered in thr civil dispute as alleged by the petitioner. Nonetheless, it is fairly concecr d that the interim direction granted by this court has, in fact, addresserr the grievance of the petitioner. Accordingry, he prays that appropriate finar orders be passed. 5 Having regard to the rival submissions and in vir: v of the fact that the grievance of the petitioner already stands redress., I by virtue of the interim order dated 1 1.08.2016, this Court finds it just ar J proper to make the said interim direction absolute. Ordered accordingly 6 with the above direction, the writ petition is dir; rosed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall :; and closed //TRUE COPYII q s I l As /.L.VIJAYALAxl{U-- .-.--' ;TANT REGJ}TFAR To 1 $EcrloN oFFICER T.he Principal secretary, Home Department secretafot, I tate of rerangana at Hyderabad. \ \

2. The Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar District, Karirr ragar. 3. The Station House Officer Rural police-Station, Karimnel ar]Karimnagar District.

4. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI s. Oie CC to SRI NfiARI PRASAD, Advocate [OPUC] 6. o;; cc io snr NIMMAGADDA SATYANARAYANA, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies SA B R HIGH COURT NTR,J DATED:1610912025 rHE SIAI \ ( o c) 'i ? IA|l ?tzB ,( i: ]. :1-5;1.,r )/1 t ( ORDER WP.No.26755 of 2016 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. @ €