Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Kummarikuna Mani Sarojini vs The Municipal Commissioner

High Court Of Telangana|04 August, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2637 of 2003
Date: August 04, 2014
Between:
Kummarikuna Mani Sarojini.
… Petitioner And
1. The Municipal Commissioner, Bapatla, Guntur District & another.
… Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2637 of 2003
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the first respondent.
2. The petitioner states that she is the absolute owner and possessor of premises bearing D.No.4-2-163, situated at Vidya Nagar, near Arts and Science College, Bapatla, Guntur District. They have been in possession of the said property since the date of purchase. There is a 40 feet existing road towards Vidya Nagar to ITI College and the petitioners have left sufficient setbacks and constructed the building after obtaining the sanctioned plan. While so, the respondents came to the premises on 08.02.2003 and threatened to demolish the structures without issuing any notice or without disclosing any reason. In those circumstances, the present writ petition was filed challenging the action of the respondents in threatening to demolish the structures made in premises bearing D.No.4-2-163, Vidya Nagar, Bapatla.
3. This Court, by order dated 19.02.2003, granted stay of demolition with a further direction not to make any further construction by the petitioner. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent filed an application to get himself impleaded and the same was ordered on 10.09.2009.
4. It appears that there is a dispute pending between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent with regard to title of the property and a second appeal is pending in this Court in that connection. However, the present writ petition was filed challenging the action of the first respondent in trying to demolish the structures made with prior permission under sanctioned plan.
5. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner except in accordance with law. This will not preclude the petitioner and the 2nd respondent to agitate their rights with regard to title to the property. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No costs.
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J Date: August 04, 2014 BSB
5 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO
WRIT PETITION No.2637 of 2003
Date: August 04, 2014
BSB
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Kummarikuna Mani Sarojini vs The Municipal Commissioner

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
04 August, 2014
Judges
  • A Ramalingeswara Rao