MA. IRA Square Township LLP. v. Sri Amir Shareef

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: K.LAKSHMAN,VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY

Judgment date: 2026-01-22

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-01-22. MA. IRA Square Township LLP. v. Sri Amir Shareef. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.

Judgment text

[ 3494 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Anicle 227 of the Constitution of lndra aggrieved by the Orders dated 17. 122025 passed in l. A. No 18g6 of 2025 in A OP No 184 of 2022 on the file of the Xl Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad. Between: 1. [/l/s. IRA Square Township LLP. , Represented by its Designated Partner, Srr Posham Narsi Reddy, S/o. Posham Venkat Reddy, O/o H. No 4-4912, Yatlinagulapally Village, Gandipet Mandal, Rangareddy District. 2. Sri Posham Narsi Reddy, S/o. Posham Venkat Reddy, aged 45 years, occ:Business, O/o. H. No 4-4912, Vattinagulapally Village, Gandipet [/landal, Rangareddy District ... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND 1 Sri Amir Shareef, S/o.

Ghouse Hareef Aged about 23 years, Occ:Educatron, R/o. H. No 22-3-465, [/iralam Mandi Charmrnar, Hyderabad 2. Sri Syed Kallemullah Hussaini, S/o. Syed Kareemullah Hussaini Aged about 30 years, Occ. Busrness, R/o. H. No 6-3-252la14311, Erramanzil, Azmaah Bandur Nagar, Kairatabad, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Syed Saifuddin, S/o. Syed Yosuf Uddin Aged about 30 years, Occ:Business, R/o H. No 22-3-54011, Mir Alam Mandi, tvlir Chowk Zehara Nagar, Charminar, Hyderabad. 4. Sri Syed Osman, S/o. Late Syed Baban Aged about 74 years, Occ. Business, R/o H. No 22-3-54011, Mir Alam Mandi, Mir Chowk Zehara Nagar, Charminar, Hyderabad. (Died on 24. O9. 2025)the legal heirs have been on record in the arbitration proceedings ARB CASE No 8 of 2024 pending on the file of Hon'ble Former Justice Sri A. Rajashekar Reddy. ... RESPONDENTS/PETITONERS 5. l\/ r Namireddy Raghuram Reddy, S/o Sri Seetharam F< Jdy, aged about years, Occ Business, R/o. H. No 18-111 , Kamalr : c1ar, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad. 6.

Mr Namireddy Rajaram reddy, S/o. Seetharam Reddy a;ed aboul 51 years Occ. Business, R/o H. No '18-'l 11, Kamalnagar, Dilshuknzrll; i, Hyderabad. 7 Sri Posham Kiran Kumar Reddy, p S/o Sri Dharma Re Jdy, aged about 51 years, Occ Business, R/o. H. No 17 1-383tM31, Vinay Nag rr Colony Saidabad. Hyderabad (R5 to R7 Not Necessary partiers in this pet t c r) 8. Srr Syed lrfan Sulaiman, S/o. Late Syed Osman, a,;:r1 about 36 years, occ Private emproynrent Rio 6-3-252rAt43ti. Erra-r e nzr. Khirathabad. Hyderabad. 9. Sri Syed Rehaman, S/o Late Syed Osman, aged about ! i years, Occ. private enrployment R/o. 16-2 565,2d Lane platan, IVlalalkpet, ll,z t:raabd,500036 10. Srr Syed Dawaood, S/o. S/o Late Syed Osman, a3:C aboul 36 years, Occ:Private employment R/o. 16-2-660, platan ivI lakpaet, Amberpet Hyderabad, 500036 (LRS of 4TH Respondent Syed Osr ernj (R5 to R10 Not Necessary parties rn thrs petition) ... RESPONDEI\] TS/RESPONDENTS l. A. No.

3 oF 2026 Petrtion under section 15'1 cpc praying that in the circ. rr;rances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, 1ne Higr, court rray be preased to suspend the operation of the order dated 17 . 1i. 2025 r: r r, fuo. l gsio of 2025 in A. oP. No. 184 of 2022 on the fire of xl Additional chief J-', lge crty civil court at Hyderabad, and treat the existing deposit of Rs. 6,00,00,0l ri- in siate Bank of lndia as interim security to the satisfaction of this Hon,ble court llending ais[osal of the above C. R. P. and pass l. A. No. 1 oF 2O26 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that In the circurr ,lances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Hign court may be p :ased to grant leave to lhe petrtioners to present civir revision petiiron against the orc :r dated it. rz. zozs in I A No 1896 of 2025 in Aop No. 184 of 2022 on the fire r Xr Additionar chief Judge Crty Civil courl at Hyderabad, by showing the LF s of 4rh respoJent i. e.

, Syed Osman as Respondents Nos. g to 10 and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner(s): Ms. Madhavi priya Mantena Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 7: None appeared Counsel for the Respondent Nos. g to 10: T. Bala Mohan Rec Jy The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE TIIGH COURT FOR THE S'I'ATE OF TEI,ANGAN. { AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLII SR]. IUSTICE K. I,AKSHiII,\N ANI) tIII] I{ON'I]I-E SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA RIiI)Ii} Civil Revision Petition No. l of 2026 Date:22. 01. 2026 Bctween: M/s. lra Square Township LLP, Rep. by its Designated Partner Sri Posham Narsi Reddy and another. .. 1)stitri,;rtr'. And Sri Amir Shareef and others. . Ite sptlr':i;:lr l" ORDER: (l'cr Hon'ble Sri Justice K. Lakshnun) I leard Sri Raja Gopallavan layi, lca:'rrccl lepresenting Ms. Madhavi Priya Mantena, Ieamed c<;unse i li,, ii. r oetitioners and Sri T. Bala Mohan Reddy, learr'. cr! ti 'r CO a respondent Nos. S to 10. Despite service ol' notice. rrtrn: ' ' ;,i --. ' lor respondent Nos. I to 7 'l'his 2.

Civit Revision Petition is llled under z\di. ie i. -1 ,' , : il Constitution of India challenging the ordel dated l;. llliil- ir, LA. No. 1896 of 2025 in A. O. P. No. l84 of 2022 oasseri b, I learned XI Additional Chief Judge, Cit)' Civil Cour:. ll,vdciiir. :tl ). Rcspontlcnt Nos. I to 4 herein have filed a I etition undcr 1) Sr--clii-r:r ol Lito Arbitration and Conciliation Act. t,)6 (for. short 'ii (' 1\. r': r>l ii)96') r. idc Arb. O. P. No. 184 of 20ll arainsr rhe heir-in and respondent ir. iitioir(rrs Nos. 5 to 7. . 1. \i idc o;drr datcd 1 I . 01 . 2024,learned trial -i Cor allorvecl the s; rci . ;. pr:iicatioir lestraining the respondent Nos. I rr 5 therein by 1171',, r i' . id-irrltrirn iniLrnction liom alienating the prr pefty covercd i:ridei \,lOLJ darcd 08. 09. 202[ and also the propertl :,tvered under L),-'r'eioiriner,i . ^. ,g[eeutcnt-curl-General Power of / ttorney dated (t)i 0-l . iric dcrcument No. 225612022 i. e. , .

{' schedr,rle i)rotrc11\ anrl tir: rcspondents therein were further : strained 1. rom i11'rr-'1 ,it'ins . ,, iti-' t[e possession ,B' of the petitioner:] over the -r;,, h,-'ri,. t i pt()t,. it_\ . 1 . i- raii,:,-,cing thc :;aid order, petitioners hereir rave preter-red an rp;. rc. rl r rrie ('ivil \{iscellaneous Appeal No. 3 li rf 2024 under Section l9 ot thc Ac1 of 1996. Vide order dated l. . 03. 2025. this Cr. xrrt. ailoq,ccl the said appeal in part vacating t I ' inter. int stay insoiar rs icslrair. rt liorn alienating the suit schedr l ) propeftv, on the c,utiitiorr o1't[-re appellants providing solvent ecurity to the satisf'action of the leamed XI Additionat Chief Judgc, Cit;, (. ivil Court, Hyderabad fbr an amount of Rs. 6,00. {)0. 00rjr- ri,ri pcmitting the appellants therein to carry out the deve ioprnent actlvtttes. 5. [n compliance with the said order, petitioners hercin l. rale lurrished Solvency Security Certificate dated 15. i 1. 2025 issueri bi.

State Bank of lndia, Specialized Startup I{ub Branch, H1. ,-ic::aba.. i alor. rg with an interlocutory application vide I. A. No. ltj96 of li)__i. Learned trial Court accepted the said Solvency Security Carti;icr:c vidc order dated 24. 1 1. 2025. 6. Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 have tlled an interlocLrlor. 1 application vide [. A. No. 1908 of 2025 in I. A. No. I3r)6 o]'-[i]--, irr Arh. O. P. No. 184 of 2022 ro recall rhe order datecl 14. ll. lfil5 ,,r, the ground that respondent Nos. 8 to l0 were not pLlt o,l ni-)lir... Vide order dated 26. I 1. 2025, leamed trial Court allo*,ed tl-le sliri -I'irr. r. c application and recalled the order dated 24. 1 1. 2025. a iiti. Ieamed trial Court passed impugned order dated 17. 12. 2025 holding that the solvency security cerlificate produced bi. the perfti6ners cannot be accepted. Hence, petitioners rvere dii-eireil ro adeqr-rate solVency security, as per tf : directiorrs tl,,.

rriih u|olttl'aild Chalienging the said order' petitionc :; tlled the cf riris {loun. . -- i i :i\ lsirlII ol the leamcd cct nsel for the 7. II is rhr' specilrc contention d Solvency the petitioners have furnislr ,r,--litionets hcr-'in that q,-gr-r:it-r' (lert, lrr:ate to thc satislaction of the learned r irll Court fbr lri ,-ri. rri,'iirtI oi Iis. 6'00,00,000/-in compliance rvith tlt order dated nl C. NI. A. No. 3 l8 of 2024. Vide rrder dated f i. il,5 1r1. i i ? i)f5. Ieat ned tLial Court accepted the said sol'" ncy secul tty fumis red by the . i l. r', ing acce,,-ted the Solvency Security ,l. ti,. ;onc,s. 1,. 'lt'nedtrialCourrcannotrecalljt;orderdated -l iruie lbrc, tlrc orders dated 26. I 1'2025 rr d 17 '12'2025 l) -':. i'. -'' :r! ^,d cont! 'ary to the order dated i I'03 2025 in llfc iii: raI r,_4 a \. 1'. ro,: I ii ,. lf l0l'1 passed by this Court lt r rnecl cotttlsel 3. \:,' rrerelt s. Sri I'. Bala Mohan ReddY, a;pcl'iiig iil r espondent Nos.

8 to l0 would c() rlend that thc Sc,lVcr]irv Sectrrity Certitrcate dated l5. ll'2025 srr )rnitted by the ( the order F the Division i{. rircl. s. is not in accot dance with l)eti1 TI t FDR obtained ilrrrcfr or- th,: Cor-rr1 in C. M. A. No. 3 18 of 2024. by petitioners is in the name of [ " petitioner and there is e very possibility of l" petitioner withdrawing the same, in rvhich eveni, the interest of respondent Nos. 8 to l0 wouicl be ,.! e lh:i_. d. Moreover', it was obtained for only one year. On coi-rsidei. ation o i the same only, Iearned trial Court recalled its cicier iiatcci 24. 11. 2025 and passed impugned order dated 17. n. :A25. Ti,crc :r; no error tn lt 9. In the tight of the aforesaid submission, ir. r the Soh,*rcr, Security Cetiflcate dated l5. l1. 2025 issued by the Stare Banl, cf india, it is specifically stated as follows: " Ms/lRA Square Township LLP deposited an cultittut! t;f' Rs. 6 Crores on I l. l 1. 2025, towards solvency sectii i!

t, tott,arcls all claints, costs, damages antl expen. ses . ,r,i. r-,1, muy he incurred by the Bank, arising out o/. ot. ;ir connec'tion u'ith the Bank. M/s. lRA SQUARE TOWNSHIP LLP agree to inden;:;t.. , the Bank against all clctims, costs, damogcs ,. :.! expenses which mtty be incuted by the Bank. arisi;tg otrt oJ, or in connection with the Bank having issued ! l:t:t Solvency Sectrrity Certificate. " l0 Perusal ol the record would reveal that the petitioners herein have obtained Fixed Deposit Receipt A/c. No. 447071732j6. daterl 04. 12. 2025 for an amount of Rs. 6 Crores, value date tr"orn 18. 11. 2025 and maturity date lg. l1. 2026. It is in the nanrr- ol l,l p. tliicrr(:i i. e.. Ivl/s. lR. A SQUARE TO$/NSHIP LI. I, . \ccording to iespondent l. los. S to 10, the said cerlificate is in tl- : nar-ne of l " peiilioncr, i1 is ;'rot in the nalre of'the Court, theref. : r:, it is not in ccr:rpiil;,ce rii'rii the oi-der dated 21. 03. 2025 in C. lv. A. No. 3t8 of f Cl1 I:,ir. sei 'c1. , i.

his Court ii l,carnei counsel appealing fbl respondent No; 3 to 10 would s:;irrnit Lirat ti:c oetitioners have to furnish Bank Gul :rntee by way . +orth ol irnrn,;vabl* Propertj/ of Rs. 6 Crores or they r:rve to obtain rDit irr the rra;ne oi'ieamec trial Courl i. e.. XI A,l litional Chief ( -ircg,:- City ivrl Corirt, Flyderabad, so as to protecr he interest of lrspcrriiie nr i'. i'cs. 8 to I0 during pendency of arbitral pr rceedings. i:. [)rring the course o1'nearing, it is brought t,r the notice of tiri:; Coul1 1it;lt . lustice A. Ra. jasheker Reddy, former. Iudge of this (-",-. r. lri. i,as rr,:e:t app,rinted as an Arbitrator and lr has already ci'irn:enced uroceedings. The said arbitral proceedir:s are posted ie. ,:3. i. i i. 2026. Rcferring to the samc, learned co utsel for the pe titioncr's r. ,,oulC contcnd that as per Section 29 of thr Act of 1996, iearaed Arbitr-ator has to conclude arbitration proc: :dings within sir.

;r:on|lis i:rrd ttetitioners are leady to fumish the srr c FDR in the namc of trial Court fbr a period of l8 months to protact th-- iii::l'cst of respondent Nos. S to 10 I 3. In the tight of thc said submission, this Revision is disuoserl of directing the petitioners herein to obtain fresh FDR in tirc n;rn;e olXl Additionat Chief Judge, City CiviI Court, H]'dc'r'ab::rj lii:: . :i ar-nount of Rs. 6 Crores lor a pcriod of l8 months to lhe ,-'rciii: r; Arb. O. P. No. 184 of 2022, file the original FDR belbre the ieari:l trial Courl within one week lrom the Cate ol receipt of'a ccor, ''ri-this order. The petitioners sha[[ submit an undenaking b<;br'': tire Ieamed trial Court that it will take necessary stelrj to e;<1t;id f-i:e said FDR till conclusion of arbitration proceedings" On fiLrnisl:irr, of the said FDR, [earned XI Additional Chief Judge. Citr'a'i,i: Courl, Hyderabad, shatl accept the said FDR.

lt is also m:idJ :1ur'-that on conclusion of the said arbitral proceedings, tni: ptiiii'r;':" and respondents 8 to l0 shall take steps, in accordance r. viti-l l:i; SDi- M. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' CTION OFFICER To, 1. The Xl Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad((with records lf any) 2. One CC to tt/ls. MADHAVI PRIYA IVANTENA, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to T. Bala lt4ohan Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies S l-B4rsl \0, HIGH COURT DATED: 2210112026 E ilHi;r, ORDER a) r ! 'l: 24 CRP. No. 1 of 2026 * PI DISPOSING THE CRP t 1,9 a lat, as

Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.