P BALAVVA, MEDAK DIST ANOTHER Vs. VENKATRAM REDDY, MEDAK DIST 2 OTHERS
LAWS(APH)-2019-3-55
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 19,2019

P Balavva, Medak Dist Another Appellant
VERSUS
Venkatram Reddy, Medak Dist 2 Others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Sanjay Kumar, J. - (1.)This contempt case was instituted alleging willful disobedience to the order dated 16.06.2015 passed in W.P.M.P.No.22304 of 2015 in W.P.No.16662 of 2015. By the said order, the respondent authorities were directed not to interfere with the possession of the writ petitioners over the lands covered by their pattadar pass books except in accordance with the due procedure laid down by law, provided the said pattadar pass books were still subsisting. Alleging interference with their possession despite the aforestated order, two out of four writ petitioners filed this contempt case.
(2.)The Tahsildar, Siddipet Mandal, the third respondent, filed a counter-affidavit. Therein, he stated that the names of the petitioners in W.P.No. 16662 of 2015 were recorded as assignee pattadars in the revenue records in relation to the land in Sy.No.1340 of Siddipet Town and Mandal, but the total extent of Acs.91.04 guntas in this survey number was classified as 'Bancharai (Government land)'. He further sated that the land was suitable for establishment of buildings and after due negotiation, the writ petitioners consented to relinquish their title and rights in relation to the subject land. According to the Tahsildar, compensation was paid to the petitioners herein under acknowledgment on 06.06.2018. He further stated that such payment was made to the two petitioners in this contempt case under Cheque bearing Nos.041866 and 041868 dated 06.06.2018, each drawn up for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/-, aggregating to Rs.5,00,000/-, in full and final settlement of their claims.
(3.)In the light of the aforestated counter-affidavit averments, Sri G.Anandam, learned counsel for the petitioners, sought time on 15.03.2019 to obtain instructions from his clients. Today, learned counsel states that he was unable to get any instructions from his clients.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.