THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO :14400 of 2007 Date: 23.6.2010 Between:
Satyavolu Naga Satyanarayana and another.
. PETITIONERS AND The Superintendent of Police, West Godavari District and others.
. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri P. Palguna Rao Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,2 and 4 : A.G.P. for Home Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 5 : None Counsel for the Respondent No.6: Sri A. Ramalinga Swamy The Court made the following :
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No :14400 of 2007 ORDER:
At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner No.1 is the husband of petitioner No.2 and son-in-law of respondent No.6. The petitioners on the one side and respondent No.6 on the other are locked in a civil dispute over a house property. The grievance of the petitioners is that at the instance of respondent No.6 in the writ petition, respondent No.4 is interfering in the civil disputes.
Respondent No.5, incumbent of Respondent No.4 is impleaded in his personal capacity as respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 filed a counter affidavit wherein he has denied the allegations of his interference in civil disputes. It is inter alia stated in the counter affidavit that respondent No.6 has approached the Superintendent of Police, West Godavari, with a petition stating that his wife has executed a will in his favour bequeathing the house property in his favour and that the petitioners, who are son-in-law and daughter respectively, allegedly living in the house on payment of rent of Rs.1,000/- per month, have been acting in an illegal and high handed manner causing mental agony to him. That on the said representation being forwarded to respondent No.5, an enquiry was made by respondent No.5 and a report was submitted wherein it was stated that the dispute between the petitioners and respondent No.6 was civil in nature and that the parties are required to approach the competent Civil Court for appropriate reliefs. It is stated in the counter affidavit that except holding enquiry on the representation made by respondent No.6, he is not interfering in civil disputes.
At the hearing, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 submitted that his client is no more and that the civil suit pertaining to the dispute over the property is pending.
In the light of the stand taken by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the counter affidavit and while placing the same on record, the writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the parties to the dispute to pursue the pending civil dispute. No costs.
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY,J DATE: 23rd June, 2010 pnb