Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 32 (0.35 seconds)
Documents citing Rai Naramma, vs State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 10 December, 2020

Polam Sarojini Devi vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 5 March, 2026

"11. It is well settled law that when a permanent injunction decree was passed by the competent civil Court, the plaintiff in the said suit is entitled for grant of police aid either by an order passed by the Court which passed the said decree or by an order passed by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 226 of the Constitution of India. The law in this regard is not res integra and the same has been 1 W.P.No.20555/2022 3 dealt with inthe case of Rai Naramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh.,2 wherein this Court held at para 7 as follows:
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vadde Sharadamma vs Smt. Khamarunnisa Begum on 23 August, 2022

In Rai Naramma Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh2, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that it is not well settled law that only when there is a decree for permanent injunction and only when there is an order of temporary injunction in an interlocutory application which is made absolute after hearing both the parties, then only the Courts usually either the civil Court or the Writ Court, would grant police aid for effective implementation of the said permanent injunction decree or a temporary injunction order which is passed on merits. But when the ex parte ad-interim injunction is granted without hearing the respondents and when the same is not made absolute granting a 2 Order dated 21.12.2020 in W.P.No.15312 of 2020 5 temporary injunction order, till the disposal of the suit, on merits, the Courts will not usually order for grant of police aid for implementation of the ex parte ad-interim injunction order. Since it is not an order on merits after hearing both the parties, the Courts would be very slow in granting police aid, till the possession and rights of the parties are determined after enquiry based on evidence.
Telangana High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - K L Goud - Full Document

Vanaparthi Subramanyam vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 26 September, 2022

11. It is well settled law that when a permanent injunction decree was passed by the competent civil Court, the plaintiff in the said suit is entitled for grant of police aid either by an order passed by the Court which passed the said decree or by an order passed by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 226 of the Constitution of India. The law in this regard is not res integra and the same has been dealt with in 6 the case of Rai Naramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 wherein this Court held at para 7 as follows:
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - C M Roy - Full Document

Ramireddy Eswaramma vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 27 September, 2022

Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances of the case, as regards the petitioners claim to order for police aid for implementation of the ad-interim injunction is concerned, the same cannot be ordered in this Writ Petition as it is well settled law that police aid can be granted only for effective implementation of the order of temporary injunction which is passed on merits or permanent injunction decree alone. Ad- interim injunction order, which was passed ex parte by dispensing with the notice to the respondents therein and which was not passed on merits and which is still pending final disposal after hearing both the parties on merits, cannot be implemented by way of granting police aid. The legal position in this regard is settled by this Court in the case of Rai Naramma 4 v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 wherein this Court held at para 7 as follows:
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - C M Roy - Full Document

Mundra Venkata Sudha Rani vs Vakudoth Vasya on 28 October, 2025

11. Learned counsel for the defendants relied upon the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Seelam Chandrayudu v. State of Andhra Pradesh 7, wherein it is referred to case of Rai Naramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh 8 holding that question of police aid to implement ad-interim injunction does not arise. Same principle is laid down by the Telangana High Court in M/s. Senthan Properties v. M/s. S.V.S. Infra Services Private 6 2022 Latest Caselaw 9331 (AP) 7 2021 SCC OnLine AP 2008 8 2022 Latest Caselaw 9457 6 RY,J crp_140_2025 Limited 9 stating that the Court cannot straight away order police aid without disposing of interim injunction petition because granting police aid to implement an ex parte injunction may sometimes cause prejudice and hardship to opposite party.
Telangana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Court In Rai Nararima vs Stafe Of Andhra Pracesh ¢ 2020 Scg Oniine ... on 9 March, 2026

WHEREAS the Paitionar above named through their Advocele Sri N Bharath Simha Redey, presented' this Petition under Article 226 of ihs Gansifution of incia praying that in the circurnstances stated in the afficayil ited therewith, the High Court may be pleased fo issue an aporopriaia writ or order or direction more particularly a writin the nature of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in interfering in chu) disputes between private parties and highhandedly ghing Police Frotectian to 9° Respondent for canstruction of compound wall and house in land belonging fo the Petiioners to an extent of Acres.Q.20 Cents in Sy. Noler/s of Perury Vilage, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Yirumali Districl when Civil Sul vide a OS.No.1149/2025 on the fle of the Court of the Hon'ble V Additional Junior Givi Judge, Trupati is pending basing on ad interim injuction dated 2.71 2022 without any palice protection order fram the cormpetent civil court and violating interim order dated 62.9025 passed oy this Hon'ble Court i WP No. 1702/2029 is Hegal, arbitrary, contrary to law laid dawn by this Harrble Court in Rai Nararima vs Stafe of Andhra Pracesh ¢ 2020 SCG Oniine ap 2083) and violative of Article 14, 2)-and 300-4 of Canstitution of india and further declare the Mama dated 27.2/8026 vide O.No.1d/Genl/SDPO- Sw x Bors OGRO088 issued by the 4° Reapon dent directing the oO" Respondent io er mravide Assistance of Folica Fr otection te 3 Respondent fo construct wee Campound Wall in Sy No TOF 1B of Peruru Vilage, Tirupell Rural Mandal, Tirupati Oietrict to an extent of Acres 0.50 Canis and Proneedings dated 23,2.2028 vide L.Dis /@23/2026 issued by the 7" Respondent requesting the 4° Respondent to provide Assistance of Police Protection to &° Respondent io construct Compound Wall in Sy Ne O78 of Peruru Vilage, Tirupati Rural Mandal, Tirupati District is | egal, ay -- contrary to law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in Ral Naramrna ve State of Andhra Pradesh ( 2020 Scc Onine AP 2053) and vidiative of Article 14, 21 and 300-4 of I Constitution of india and set aside the same and. direct the Respondents not to provide Assistance of Police Protection fo gi Respondent to construct Compound Wall in the subject land of the Petitioners ane to demolish the constructed compound wail.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next