E. Narasimha v. Om Prakash
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA,GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-15. E. Narasimha v. Om Prakash. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
I [ 34e1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMT BHATTACHARYA AND THE FIONOURABLE SRt JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO: 1611 OF 2018 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent preferred against the order dated 27. 09. 2018 in the W. P. No. 27477 of 2018. on the file of the High Court. Between: 1. E. Narasimha, S/o. Late E. Jangaiah (died per LRs) 2. E. Krishna, s/o. Late E. Agaiah Aged. 46 years, R/o.. H. No. 9-1-431, Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 3. E. satyam, s/o. E. Mallesh, Aged. 32 Years, occ. Business, R/o. H. No. Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad 4. E. Balamani, D/o. E. Mallesh Aged. 32 Years, occ. Household, R/o. H. No. 9-2- 300, Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 5. E. Lakshmamma, w/o. E. Mallesh Aged. 59 years, occ. Household, R/o. H. No. 9-2-300, Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 6. E. Mallesh, S/o. E. Agaiah Aged.
58 Years, occ. Emproyee, R/o. H. No. 9-2-343, Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 7. E. Mallesh, S/o. Late Rarnaiah (died per LRs) 8. E. Kumar, S/o. Late Veera Mallesh Aged. 43 Years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H. No. g- 2-423, Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 9. E. Srinivas, S/o. Late E. Narasimha Aged. 44Years, occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 9- 2-3C. Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 10. E. Ramu, S/o. Late E. Narasimha Aged. 35 Years, occ. Business, Rl/o. g- H. No. 2-3C. Pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. 11. E. Kamala Bai, wo. Late E. Mallesh Aged. 58 years, occ. Househord. 12. E. Vijay Kumar, S/o. Late E. Mallesh Aged. 44 Years, Occ. Business. 13. E. Raj Kumar, S/o. Late E. Mallesh Aged. 35 Years, Occ. Business. - 7. / //, 14. E. Anil Kumar, s/o. Late E. Mailesh Aged. years, 33 occ. Business, Appellants No. 11 to 14 are residents of H. No. 9-2-423rA, pensionpura, Langer House, Hyderabad. .. APPELLANTS/RES PONDENTS AND 1. om Prakersh, s/o. Late seethar singh, Aged.
60 years, occ. Business, R/o.. H. No. 1 3-t;-8221 36 t 21, Bapti N agar, tln geriiouO HyO"rabad. 2. K. Pratap, S/o. K. Nagi Reddy,-Aged. ss years, 6cc. Engineer, R/o. -' Frat No. 4, Shilpa Aperrtments, Erramanzii Coiony, HVOeraUlO. ... RES POND E NTS/P ETITION E RS 3' The comrnissioner, Survey Settlements and Land Records cum Appellate Authority, Sitate of Telangana, At trt araya n guJ"l nyO"i"O"O, i"L. i" r, 4' The Assistant Director oisurvey and Land-Records, Ranga Reddy District. ... RESPONDENTS l. A. NO: 1 OF 201Q Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in su'f,port of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the impugned judgmerrt passed by learned Single Judge in w. p. No. 27477 of 2014dated 27-09-2018. l. A.
NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition undet section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in suPport of the petition, the High court may be pleased to grant (6) weeks time for verilying the records related to the case herein and any other material available with the olfices of Revenue Department and to fire comprehensive affidavit in this Writ Appeal. \ Gounselfor the Appellant Nos. 2 TO 4, 7,8, 10 & 13: SRI KUNCHA SUNIL GOUD Gounselfor the Appellant Nos. 5,6,9,11,12 & 14: SRI KUNCHA SUNIL GOUD/ SRI RAKESH SNAGHI Counselfor the Respondent Nos. l & 2: SRIVEDULA SRINIVAS, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI O. MANOHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3 & 4: GP FOR REVENUE The Gourt made the following: JUDGMENT ! t IN TIIE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT No. 1 11 oF 2018 DATE: 15. o,4. 20. 26 Betrveen: Mr. D. Narasimha (died) and 13 others . Appellants AND Mr.
Om Prakash and 3 others. ... Respondents Mr. Kuncha Sunil Goud, Mr. Rakesh Sanghi and Mr. M. A. Mujeeb, Iearned counser appearing for the appellants. Mr' vedula lirinivas, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. o. Manohar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. i and 2. JUDGMEN'I: lper Hon,bte Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya) L The (lommissioner of Survey Settlements and Land Records at I. lyderabad, conductecr a survey of rand in Sy. Nos . 16, rz,1g/ 1 , rg/2, 1. 8 I 3, 18 I 4, r 9 and 2r situated ar l{ydershakote vilrage, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy l)istrict, pursuant to the direction given by the learned Singre Judge of this court on 27. O9. 2O18 in W. p. No. 2Z4ZT ot 2Ot4. / ! MB,J & GPK,J wA_l611_2018 2. The learned Single Judge order dated 27. O9. 2O18 records that the Survey has already been carried out on O9. O9. 2O14 and that learned counsel appearing for the appellants seeks to challenge the Survey Report before the Court. 3. The Respondent Nos.
l and 2 were Writ Petitioners in W. P. No. 27477 of 2Ol4 who sought for setting aside of the order dated 09. O9. 2O 14 passed in Rc. No. F2l1762l2OI4 by the Commissioner of Survey Settlements and Land Records at Hyderabad. 4. The appellants were the respondents before the Writ Court. The dispute in the Writ Petition is brought before the Court that whether the Writ Petitioners'plots were situated in Sy. Nos. 15/t or 1814. The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition No. 27477 of 2014 on 27. O9. 2014 setting aside the order dated 09. O9. 2O 14. Pursuant to the said order, a fresh Survey was conducted. The result of the fresh Survey aligned with the stands taken on behalf of the Writ Petitioners. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants takes an objection to the lindings in the Survey Report. However, the fresh Survey Report is not a subject matter in the present appeal.
The Appellants are given liberty to challenge the Survey Report before the appropriate forum for con\qucting fresh survey in accordance with law. / J MB,J & GPK,J wA_l611_2018 6. W. A.. No. 1611 of 2018, along with all the connected applications, stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL DEP REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY// OFFICER To 1. The Conrmissioner, Survey Settlements and Land s Cum Appellate AuthoritY State of Telangana, At Narayanguda , Hyderabad, Telangana Assi :;tant Director of SurveY and Land Record s, Ranga ReddY District 2. The Advocate IOPUC] 3. One CC lo SRI KUNCHA SUNIL GOUD, 4. One CC lo SRI RAKESH SANGHI, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRI M. A. MUJEEB, Advocate [OPUCI 6. CC t:o SRI O. MANOHAR REDDY, Advocate loPUCl One CC:; to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at 7. Two Hyderabad. [OUT] 8. Two CD,Sopies PSK. TKS flk \ . l HIGH COIURT DATED | 15104t2026 . ,. ". ,.. TLIE S GR t 6 2 1 APfl 202$ JUDGMENIT * *. ... ... , \ t WA.
No. 161 1 of ' . -':'_'! :. ',. ' 201g _;(. r '*-. --.. -5:.... -,, ". DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT (3OSTS &'
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.