IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 1489 of 2010 Between: Madugula Chandra Reddy ..... PETITIONER(S) AND The Station Hosue Officer, Uppal p.s. Cyberabad, R.R.District and others. .....RESPONDENT(S) THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 1489 of 2010 ORDER : The petitioners claim to be the owners of an extent of Ac.1.31½ guntas of land in Sy. No.51/A/D, situated at Peerzadiguda village, Ghatkesar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. According to them, the land was purchased from the original owner and ever since they are in possession and enjoyment of the same. While so, when the unofficial respondents are claiming title over the property, they were constrained to file O.S.No.1395 of 2009 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, against the unofficial respondents and the trial Court by its decree and judgment, dated 10- 12-2009, decreed the suit as prayed for. Despite the said decree, which has become final, the police at the instance of the unofficial respondents are trying to interfere with their peaceful possession and are preventing the petitioners from entering into the land in question. Hence, they approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Home and perused the record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that a petition to set aside the ex parte decree was filed before the trial Court, but no orders have been passed. He further submitted that filing of the said application cannot be a ground for the police to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioners in view of the said decree and judgment. 4. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the trial Court by its decree and judgment dated 10-12-2009, decreed the suit, and of course it is an ex parte decree, but, however, if the unofficial respondents i.e. R-2 to R-4 still claim title over the property, they could have filed an appeal questioning the said judgment or filed an application to set aside the said ex parte decree and judgment, but they cannot resort to this sort of activity and the police also cannot provide protection. There is substance in the contention put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed at the stage of admission and the 1st respondent-Station House Officer, Uppal Police Station, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District is directed not to interfere with the petitioners’ peaceful possession of the land in question, without following the due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ 29th January, 2010 kvr