Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Gurram Bixam, Nalgonda Dist. vs C. Satyam Babu, Nalgonda Dist. on 25 January, 2022

Author: Satish Chandra Sharma

Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili

     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                                       AND
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI


                                         C.C.No. 2299 of 2016

Order: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)

          The present Contempt case is arising out of Order dated 12.11.2015,

passed in W.A.No.1006 of 2015.

2.        The facts of the case reveal that there was a serious dispute between

the present petitioner, who was appellant in the writ appeal and one

P.Satyanarayana, who was respondent No.1 in the writ appeal. There was

an allegation that respondent No.1 in the writ appeal is constructing over the land belonging to the present petitioner. A civil suit i.e., O.S.No.23 of 2015 was also pending between parties and an injunction order was also passed in the matter. In those circumstances, this Court has directed Miryalguda Municipality, respondent No.3 in the writ appeal, to take a final decision in the matter taking into account the orders passed in the civil suit on 14.07.2015.

3. A detailed affidavit has been filed by the respondent/Commissioner, Miryalguda Municipality and the same reads as under:

"After receipt of the orders for this Hon'ble court, the Miryalaguda Municipality, after considering the representation dated 08.122015 of Sri P.Sathyanarayan, who is the respondent No.1 in Writ Appeal, and the representations dated 16.03.2016 and 06.04.2016 of petitioner in the Writ Appeal, has fixed the date i.e. on 12.04.2016 for conducting survey and engaged one licensed Surveyor of Municipality namely Sri. Ch.Srinivas and attached Town Planning Staff for physical inspection and also to take measurements of the said property in the presence of petitioner and respondent No.1. The licensed surveyor namely Sri. 2 Ch.Srinivas along with Town Planning Staff have measured the plot in dispute and submitted a report with measurement and map to the Municipality Miryalguda, Nalgonda District on dt: 12-04-2016.
It is respectfully submitted that, after receipt of the survey report from the licensed surveyor on 12.04.2016, this municipality, based on the said report, has pass the proceedings No.G/2078/2016, dated 30.04.2016 and the same was dispatched on 12.05.2016 to the petitioner and respondent No.1 in Writ Appeal. It is also submitted that the application i.e., I.A.No.582 of 2015 in O.S.No.23 of 2015 filed for temporary injunction by the petitioner in Writ Appeal before the Hon'ble VIII Addl. District Judge at Miryalguda was dismissed on 16.09.2016.
It is further submitted that the Miryalguda Municipality has wrote a letter to the Tahasildar, Miryalaguda, vide Lr.No. 1484/TPO/2015 dated 22.01.2016 for conduct of survey in Survey No.797 for fixing boundaries. Whereas the Miryalaguda Municipality is not the competent authority to fix the boundaries of the land.
In view of the above facts and circumstances, I complied the Hon'ble Court orders passed in WA. No. 1006 of 2015 dt: 12-11-2015 on 30.04.2016. I am law abiding citizen and I never disobey the orders of the Hon'ble Court Orders. If this Hon'ble Court feels that I have disobeyed this Hon'ble Court orders, I am tendering unconditional apology to this Hon'ble Court.
It is respectfully submitted this respondent has great respect towards this Hon'ble Court and I have not disobeyed the orders of this Hon'ble Court deliberately."

4. The aforesaid affidavit makes it very clear that the suit itself was dismissed with costs. In the considered opinion of this Court, no further orders are required to be passed by the respondent as he has already passed order dated 30.04.2016, which was dispatched to both the parties, who were litigating over their rights.

3

5. Resultantly, the present Contempt Case stands disposed of with liberty to the parties to assail the orders passed by the respondent in accordance with law.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, stand disposed of.

________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Date: 25.01.2022 LUR