THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.A.No.1786 of 2002 JUDGMENT: (Per the Honb’e Smt Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ appeal arises out of the order dated 18.4.2002 in W.P. No.1727 of 2002 whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner seeking to mutate his name in the municipal records was allowed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant is the 2nd respondent, 1st respondent is the writ petitioner and 2nd respondent is the 1st respondent in the writ petition. The parties are hereinafter referred to as they are arrayed in the writ petition. The facts of the case are that the writ petitioner filed O.S.No.130 of 1993 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Medak, wherein his title in respect of property in House No.3-2-34 and 2-1-17 in Sanga Reddy Municipality was declared. Subsequently, he submitted an application to the1st respondent for mutation of his name in the municipal records. But, the 1st respondent passed an order on 11.12.2001 rejecting the application of the writ petitioner on the premise of an objection taken by the 2nd respondent that the decree is not registered and that there are mistakes crept in the decree of the trial Court. The learned single Judge having observed that rejection of the application on the ground that the decree is not registered and there are mistakes crept in it, would in a way amount to obstruction of legal process and may give rise to contempt of court also, set aside the order impugned and allowed the writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that an application has been moved before the Court below for review of the decree and therefore writ appeal may be taken up after disposal of the said review. We are not inclined to accept the contention raised by the counsel for the appellant and we are of the opinion that pendency of any interlocutory application before the Court below is not a bar for the 2nd respondent herein to mutate the name of the writ petitioner in the municipal records in respect of the property in question, if not already done. With the above observation, the writ appeal is disposed of. __________________ (T.MEENA KUMARI,J) ___________________ (SANJAY KUMAR,J) 7.7.2009 rkk