Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50824 (AP)

K PARAMESWARI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/26664/2025 · 2025-09-24

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010517472025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 26664 OF 2025 Between: 1. K PARAMESWARI, W/o. K. Subramanyam Naidu, Aged about 64 years, R/o. 20-4-34/30, Subba Reddy Nagar, Tirupati, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Home Depart its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Tirupati District. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chandragiri Sub Division, MR Palli Police Station, Tirupati, Tirupati District 4. The Station House Officer S H O, Tiruchanur Police Station, Tirupati District. 5. S Raghupathi, S/o S. Munirathnam, Aged 28 years, R/o. Door No. 20 S1-65, Erramitta, Near LeelaMahal, Tirupati, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA PETITION NO: 26664 OF 2025 1. K PARAMESWARI, W/o. K. Subramanyam Naidu, Aged about 64 years, 34/30, Subba Reddy Nagar, Tirupati, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Home Department, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Tirupati District. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chandragiri Sub Division, MR Palli irupati District 4. The Station House Officer S H O, Tiruchanur Police Station, Tirupati 5. S Raghupathi, S/o S. Munirathnam, Aged 28 years, R/o. Door No. 20 65, Erramitta, Near LeelaMahal, Tirupati, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, ...Respondents IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 1. K PARAMESWARI, W/o. K. Subramanyam Naidu, Aged about 64 years, 34/30, Subba Reddy Nagar, Tirupati, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, ...Petitioner ment, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District. 3. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chandragiri Sub Division, MR Palli 4. The Station House Officer S H O, Tiruchanur Police Station, Tirupati 5. S Raghupathi, S/o S. Munirathnam, Aged 28 years, R/o. Door No. 20-48- 65, Erramitta, Near LeelaMahal, Tirupati, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents, more particularly Respondent No. 4, in interfering with the civil disputes between Petitioners and Respondent No. 5 in respect of the property i.e. Plot No.4 admeasuring an extent of 100 Sq. Yds/900 Sq. Feet in Survey No.215/2 of Chennayagunta Village, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District, A.P.as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violating Petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No. 4 not to interfere in civil disputes between Petitioner and Respondent No. 5 in respect of the property.e. Plot No.4 admeasuring an extent of 100 Sq. Yds/900 Sq. Feet in Survey No.215/2 of Chennayagunta Village, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District, A.P.and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 4 not to interfere in civil disputes between Petitioner and Respondent No. 5 in respect of the property i.e. Plot No.4 admeasuring an extent of 100 Sq. Yds/900 Sq. Yds/900 Sq. Feet in Survey No.215/2 of Chennayagunta Village, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District, A.P.and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: KANDERI CHETHAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 26664 OF 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents, more particularly Respondent No. 4, in interfering with the civil disputes between Petitioners and Respondent No. 5 in respect of the property i.e. Plot No.4 admeasuring an extent of 100 Sq. Yds/900 Sq. Feet in Survey No.215/2 of Chennayagunta Village, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District, A.P.as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violating Petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No. 4 not to interfere in civil disputes between Petitioner and Respondent No. 5 in respect of the property.e. Plot No.4 admeasuring an extent of 100 Sq. Yds/900 Sq. Feet in Survey No.215/2 of Chennayagunta Village, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, Tirupati District, A.P.and pass…” 02. Heard Sri Kanderi Chethan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri V. Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondents. 03. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that she is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Ac.1.90 cents in Sy.No.215/2 of Chennayagunta Village, Tirupati (Urban) Mandal, having purchased the same under a registered sale deed dated 07.03.2008 vide Document No.1445/2008. The petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said property and has laid out plots therein. It is stated that a civil suit in O.S.No.241 of 2014 on the file of the IV Additional District Judge, Tirupati, was filed by one Bhaskar Reddy and others against the petitioner and others seeking declaration and permanent injunction, which was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs on 15.04.2024. 04. The grievance of the petitioner is that, after the said decree, the 5th respondent started interfering and allegedly instigated the 4th respondent, the Station House Officer, to threaten and coerce the petitioner for repayment of amounts allegedly due under a sale transaction. It is alleged that police have been visiting the petitioner’s house and threatening her, though the dispute is purely civil in nature. 05. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the respondent No.4 never called or contacted with the petitioner and never deputed his staff to the house of the petitioner to call her to the police station and further submitted that the respondent No.4 did not instigated the petitioner to demand the petitioner repay the amount to the respondent No.5. 06. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the petitioner may be granted liberty to work out her remedies before the competent civil court. 07. Having regard to the submissions made by both sides and on perusal of the material on record, this Court is of the opinion that the dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent is purely civil in nature. 08. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, the 4th respondent – Station House Officer, Tirupati, is directed not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioner and the 5th respondent in any manner. The police shall not summon or call the petitioner to the police station unless a cognizable case is registered against her in accordance with law. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent civil court and work out her remedies in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. __________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 25.09.2025. KKV 592 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO:26664 OF 2025 25.09.2025 KKV