HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23344 OF 2003 Date : 29.12.2009 Between: Malayala Yashoda. …… Petitioner And Municipal Corporation of Warangal, through its Commissioner & others. …..Respondents. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23344 OF 2003 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration by way of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of 1st respondent- Municipal Corporation on the applications submitted by the petitioner on 12.05.1982, 21.07.2001, 04.08.2003 and 29.08.2003, for transfer of 1/6th share in the house property bearing Door No.12-2-147, situated at Pinnavari Street of Warangal, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Petitioner claims that her father Late Kalyanam Ramchander was the owner of the house property bearing Door No.12-2-147, situated at Pinnavari Street in Warangal town. She filed a suit in O.S.No/334 of 1982 before the Principal District Munsif, Warangal, seeking for partition and separate possession of 1/6th share in the said house property. A preliminary decree was passed in the said suit on 15.06.1988. It is the case of the petitioner that after the preliminary decree, the petitioner and her brother have divided the property amongst themselves amicably, and she came into possession of 1/6th share in the house of her Late father. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though she has filed the representations, dated 12.05.1982, 21.07.2001, 04.08.2003 and 29.08.2003, before the 1st respondent- Municipal Corporation, seeking for transfer of her name in the Assessment Registers of the Municipality with respect to her 1/6th share, the same are not being acted upon. Hence, this writ petition. 3. The 2nd respondent herein has filed counter affidavit, denying the possession of petitioner over the house in question. In the counter, it is further denied that there was a settlement and division of property in question, after the preliminary decree. 4. Though it is claimed by the petitioner that she came into possession of 1/6th share in the house property by virtue of a settlement after passing of preliminary decree in O.S.No.334 of 1982, but the same is denied by the 2nd respondent in the counter affidavit. As much as no final decree is passed in the suit, and further, in the absence of division of property, the 1st respondent-Corporation cannot act upon the applications filed by the petitioner for transfer of 1/6th share in her favour. Though it is open for the petitioner to file an application before the Court concerned, for passing of final decree in the suit to the extent of her share as per the preliminary decree, but before passing of any final decree, she cannot seek for transfer of property in her name. 5. In that view of the matter, keeping it open for the petitioner to move the competent Court for passing of final decree as per her entitlement in terms of the preliminary decree, and thereafter, to move the authority concerned for transfer of property, this writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 29th December 2009 N.B: Furnish C.C. in one week. (b/o.) ajr