IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7480 of 2008 Between: HAL Venkateshwara Plot Owners Welfare Association, Regd.No. 1147/2006, Office at Plot No. 235, HAL Colony, Kondapur, Hyderabad, Rep. by its President Sri K. Shakarlal Naik, S/o. Eshwar Naik, Aged about 46 Years. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 K.V.G.L.V. Prasada Rao, S/o. late Sri K.V. Subba Rao, R/o. Bayanavari Bazar, Penamalur, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2 K.B. Tilak, S/o. K.V. Subba Rao, R/o. H.NO. 9-121/1, Plot No. 244, Road No. 15, Vijayapuri Colony, Kothapet, Hyderabad. 3 K. Vijayamohan, S/o. K.V. Subba Rao, R/o. H.No. 2-52/4, Chaitanyapuri, Hyderabad -60. 4 The JOint Sub Registrar-II, (Stamps and Registration), O/o. The District Registrar, Ranga Reddy, Office at Moosapet, Ranga Reddy District. 5 Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Paigah Palace, Secunderabad. 6 Zonal Commissioner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Circle No. II, Sherlingampally, Hyderabad. 7 Surya M. Reddy, S/o. M. Kista Reddy, R/o. 91/C, Venkateshwara Society, Road No. 12, MLA Colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 8 Srinidhi Reddy, D/o. Surya M. Reddy, R/o. Road No. 12, MLA Colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 9 Smt. Arunasree M. Reddy, W/o. Surya M. Reddy, R/o. Road No. 12, MLA Colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad. 10 Sri B. Sainadh Reddy, S/o. B. Vittal Reddy, R/o. H.No. 16-11-310/14/3, Sunanda Apartments, Malakpet, Hyderabad. 11 N. Vijay, S/o. N. Prakash Rao, R/o. H.No. 16-2-751/C/2, Tirumala Hills, Osmangadh, Hyderabad. 12 B. Purushotham Reddy, S/o. Vittal Reddy, R/o. H.NO. 16-11/310/14/3, Sunanda Apartments, Malakpet, Hyderabad. 13 D. Rajashekar Reddy, S/o. D. Parvath Reddy, R/o. H.No. 22-72, Saraswathi Nagar, Gaddiannaram, Hyderabad. 14 Sridhar M. S/o. Yadaiah M., R/o. Plot NO. 30, Andhra Bank Colony, Malakept, Hyderabad. 15 Ch. Venkateshwar Reddy, S/o. Hanmanth Reddy, R/o. H.No. 22-116, Saraswathi Nagar, Gaddianaram, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Writ or Order or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or proceedings to declare the action of the respondents 4 to 6 for not taking any steps preventing the Respondents 1 to 3 from alienating the lands to the Respondents 7 to 15 is illegal, bad and consequently declare the registrations made by the Respondents 1 to 3 in favour of the Respondents 7 to 15 are null and void and direct the respondents 4 to 6 not to regularize and plots bearing No. 187/1 to 187/12 registered in favour of the Respondents NO. 7 to 15 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 7480 of 2008 Order: The case of the petitioner-Association is that they purchased the land to an extent of Ac.19.08 guntas in Survey Nos.110/2 and 111 of Kondapur village, Sherilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, from respondent Nos.1 to 3 under an agreement of sale dated 11.11.1981. Pursuant thereto, they obtained sanctioned lay out from BUDA, and developed the land by dividing into plots, earmarked the common areas like parks, commercial spaces, school area, temple area etc., and also laid roads as per the lay out. Later on, one Y.B.K. Rao, the GPA holder of respondent Nos.1 to 3, has also executed registered sale deeds in favour of the members of the petitioner-Society in respect of about 185 plots formed in the above said land on different dates starting from 1989 to 2004 and inducted them into possession. While so, respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed suits for cancellation of sale deeds executed by Y.B.K. Rao in favour of the members of the petitioner-Association on the ground that they never authorized Y.B.K. Rao to execute the sale deeds in favour of the members of the petitioner-Association and that the petitioner- Association has not paid the balance sale consideration to them. While the said suits are pending consideration, respondent Nos.1 to 3 have alienated the common area, which is already sold to the petitioner- Association and earmarked for common usage to the plot owners of the petitioner-Association, by forming house plots, to respondent Nos.7 to 15. Hence, they filed the present writ petition seeking to declare the registrations made by respondent Nos.1 to 3 in respect of the plots bearing Nos.187/1 to 187/12 in Survey Nos.110/2 and 111, situated at Kondapur village, Sherlingampally Mandal, R.R. District, in favour of respondent Nos.7 to 15 are null and void and to direct respondent Nos.4 to 6 not to regularize the said transactions. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-Association, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of respondent No.4 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6 respectively. The contention of the petitioner-Association is that respondent Nos.1 to 3, contrary to the original lay out sanctioned on 04.02.1982, alienated the common area, which was already sold to the petitioner- Association and earmarked for common usage of the plot owners, by converting the same into house plots, to respondent Nos.7 to 15, and are now trying to get the same regularized by respondent Nos. 4 to 6. Whether the land in question was sold to the petitioner-Association by respondent Nos.1 to 3, and if so whether the same is meant for common usage of the plot owners of the petitioner-Association as per the original lay out and whether respondent Nos.1 to 3 have no right or authority to alienate the same to respondent Nos.7 to 15 or not are all disputed questions of fact. In fact, the pleadings of the petitioner show that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 have already filed suits for cancellation of sale deeds executed by one Y.B.K. Rao in favour of the members of the petitioner-Association. When the plots alleged to have been sold by one Y.B.K. Rao as the GPA holder of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to the members of petitioner-Association, are said to be subject matter of the suits filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3, seeking cancellation of the sale deeds executed by Y.B.K. Rao, no relief can be given to the petitioners in this writ petition. Since the writ petition raises disputed questions of fact, the remedy of the petitioner-Association, is to approach the competent civil Court, and get their grievances redressed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner-Association to approach the Competent Civil Court for redressal of its grievances, if any. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 08.04.2008 Nsr ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}