APHC010640072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 33173/2025 Between: 1. B SRIKANTH, S/O. VASU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO. DOOR NO.20-3-15A, SIVAJYOTHI RESIDENTIAL AREA, 20TH WARD, TIRUPATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION SITUATED IN SY.NO.699/2B2, TIRUPATI MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT CURRENTLY RESIDING AT D.NO.4/20, S.R.B NAGAR, 4TH STREET, KOLLATHUR, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, TAMILNADU STATE. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE TIRUPATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP BY ITS.. COMMISSIONER,TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT. 3. PAMAM LAKSHMI, W/O LATE P. PAVAN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 39 YRS, R/O D.NO.10-1-09, AKUTHOTA STREET, TIRUPATI URBAN, TIRUPATI ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 toPleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2 respondents in updating the municipal records in favor of 3rd Respondent for the house bearing door No.20-3-15A Sivajyothi Residential Area, 20th ward, Tirupati Municipal Corporation situated in Sy.No.699/2B2, Tirupati Mandal, Tirupati District as arbitrary, illegal. contrary to well-established legal principles, and violative of my fundamental and constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to keep the municipal records in abeyance for the subject property pending disposal of the Original Suit 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 pleased to direct keep the municipal records in abeyance for house property house bearing door No.20-3-15/Y, Sivajyothi Residential Area, 20th ward, Tirupati Municipal Corporation situated in Sy.No.699/2B2, Tirupati Mandal, Tirupati District, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 for filing of the Reply Affidavit and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2026 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 the petitioner to file the Counter affidavit and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PAPUDIPPU SASHIDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. POTHAM VENGALA REDDY SC For M.Corporation in Rayalaseema region In 2. VMR LEGAL 3. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 3 The Court made the following Order:- The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of respondent No.2 in mutating the name of the 3rd respondent in respect of house bearing Door No.20-3- 15/Y, Sivajyothi Residential Area, 20th Ward, Tirupati Municipal Corporation, Sy.No.699/2B2, Tirupati Mandal, Tirupati District, as illegal and seeks consequential relief of keeping the same in abeyance. 2. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the subject property stood in the name of the petitioner's grandfather and, subsequently, by a deed of settlement, the property devolved upon the petitioner. The 3rd respondent has also claimed the subject property by virtue of an unregistered Will. It is submitted that the municipal records reflected the name of the petitioner's grandfather till the impugned mutation in favour of the 3rd respondent was effected. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition seeking a direction to mutate the petitioner's name in the municipal records as the owner of the property. Thereafter, the said writ petition was withdrawn as O.S. No.121 of 2025 was filed by the 3rd respondent seeking the relief of partition. The petitioner is arrayed as defendant No.5 in the said suit and, with an intent to contest the suit on merits, withdrew the writ petition. 4. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent is now projecting the mutation in her favour as an additional document to consolidate her claim over the subject property. It is also submitted that the 3rd respondent has filed Criminal Petition 4 No.6312 of 2026 before this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.174 of 2026, which was registered on the complaint of one Sashikala against the petitioner alleging fabrication and forgery of the Will dated 05.08.2010. It is submitted that the 3rd respondent has taken an additional ground therein that the municipal authorities have recognised her claim over the property and mutated her name. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that the documents submitted by the petitioner and the 3rd respondent were forwarded to the Standing Counsel for the Tirupati Municipal Corporation, Tirupati, who opined that mutation could be effected in the name of respondent No.3, and, after obtaining the said legal opinion, the 2nd respondent mutated the name of the 3rd respondent. 6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submits that the 3rd respondent inherited the property by virtue of a Will, which became operative with effect from 28.06.2014 upon the demise of V. Govindarajulu. It is submitted that the suit for partition is pending and that the property could not have continued to reflect the name of a deceased person. Accordingly, the third respondent sought mutation of her name in the municipal records. It is also submitted that the defendants therein are injuncted from alienation of the subject property. As such, there is no threat of creation of third-party rights over the subject property. 5 7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 further submits that the 3rd respondent shall not alienate the property in favour of any third party and that there is no threat of any further mutation in favour of any third party on the strength of any document relied upon by the 3rd respondent. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 9. The suit for partition is pending, and it is left open to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent to contest the same. Insofar as the mutation of the property based on the Will submitted by the third respondent is concerned, the interim proceedings dated 07.11.2025 are hereby suspended, and the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent shall have to adjudicate their grievance before the competent Civil Court. The Civil Court shall dispose of the suit on its own merits, without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court in the present writ petition. 10. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Needless to mention, the 2nd respondent shall mutate the names in the municipal records in terms of the decree passed by the Trial Court. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 06.08.2026 RSD 7 50 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 33173/2025 06.08.2026 RSD