APHC010577462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3559] TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA WRIT APPEAL NO: 1139/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent be pleased to SET ASIDE the order dt. 15-09-2025 passed in W.P.No.24725/2025 by dismissing the W.P.No.24725/2025 and pass such Between: 1. SMT. P. ANITHA REDDY,, W/O P. RADHAKRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. HOUSEWIFE, R/O H.N0.1-9-34/A/4/1, 0PP. BANGALORE BAKERY LANE, RAMNAGAR, HYDERABAD, REP. BY GPA HOLDER, S.K. VISWANATHA REDDY, S/O LATE MALLIKARJUNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. BUSINESS, R/O H.NO.3-70, O.C. COLONY, SANTHEKUDLUR VILLAGE, ADONI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...APPELLANT AND 1. ALIGARI CHINNA THIKKAPPA SANNA THIKAPPA, S/O A. KARIBANTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. AGRICULTURE, R/O H.NO.5-120, SC COLONY, SANTHEKUDLUR VILLAGE, ADONI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 4. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KURNOOL REVENUE 2 DIVISION, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. THE TAHSILDAR, ADONI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 6. THE MANDAL SURVEYOR, OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, ADONI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 dispense with the filing of certified copy of order dt.15-09- 2025 passed in W.P.No.24725/202 5 before this Hon’ble Court and pass such IA NO: 2 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 grant LEAVE to file Writ Appeal against the order dt. 15- 09-2025 passed in W.P.No.24725/2025 and pass such IA NO: 3 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 condone the delay of 6 days in filing the Writ Appeal and pass such IA NO: 4 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 STAY the operation of the order dt.15-09-2025 passed in W.P.No.24725/2025 and pass such Counsel for the Appellant: 1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. SHAIK KARIMULLA 3 The Court made the following Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao) The 1st respondent herein approached this Court, by way of W.P.No.24725 of 2025 contending that he has filed F-line application dated 28.08.2025 for conducting survey for fixation of boundaries of the land admeasuring Ac.0-09 cents in Sy.No.241-B3C situated at Santhekudlur Village, Adoni Mandal, Kurnool District is not being acted upon by the respondents and a direction is required to be issued to the respondents to conduct the said survey. 2. A learned Single Judge of this Court by an order, dated 15.09.2025 after recording the contention of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the subject land, had disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents therein, to consider the F-line application, dated 25.08.2025, by issuing notice to all the concerned interested persons and to pass necessary orders. 3. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant, who is a third party to the writ petition has filed the present appeal seeking leave of this Court which has been granted. 4. The case of the appellant is that she has claimed right over the very same property and has already filed O.S.No.29 of 2025 in the Court of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Adoni and the same is pending. The appellant contends that the 1st respondent herein is arrayed as 4th defendant in the said suit. It is further contended, that the said suit which has been filed for partition 4 of the property was served on the 1st respondent herein and that the 1st respondent had filed a written statement in the suit. It is contended that the 1st respondent, having notice of the suit and claim of the appellant, had deliberately suppressed these facts in the writ petition filed by him and as such, the order obtained by the 1st respondent is based on suppression of facts and requires to be set aside. 5. Sri Shaik Karimulla, learned counsel for the 1st respondent would submit that the appellant has no right or claim over the property and in any event, the property which is the subject matter of the suit is different from the property which is the subject matter of the writ petition. He would pointed out that Ac.0- 09 cents of land claimed by the 1st respondent, is situated in Sy.No.241/B3C whereas the land of Ac.0-25 cents claimed by the appellant is situated in Sy.No.241-B3 only. Learned counsel would draw the attention of this Court to the boundaries set out in the F-line application and the boundaries set out in the plaint in the suit and that the boundaries are also different as such, the same piece of land is not the subject matter of both the proceedings. Learned counsel would further submit that on account of these facts, the 1st respondent had not pleaded pendency of O.S.No.29 of 2025 and as such, there is no suppression of fact by the 1st respondent. 6. The land claimed by the appellant, in O.S.No.29 of 2025 is Ac.0-25 cents of land in Sy.No.241/B3. The land claimed by the 1st respondent is in Sy.No.241/B3C. It is obvious that Sy.No.241/B3C could have been created only by sub-dividing Sy.No.241/B3. In such circumstances, the pendency of 5 the suit, which is the relevant factor, for this Court to consider, has been suppressed. 7. It is settled law that any order obtained by suppressing facts cannot be permitted to stand. 8. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 15.09.2025, in W.P.No.24725 of 2025 leaving it open to the 1st respondent to take such steps permissible under law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J Date: 04.11.2025 KA/KSS 6 217 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA WRIT APPEAL NO: 1139/2025 Date: 04.11.2025 KA/KSS