HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24661 of 2007 Dated: 08-02-2008 Between: Aluri Raga Latha & another. … Petitioners And The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24661 of 2007 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioners seek directions by way of Mandamus to declare the action of 2nd respondent in interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioners and the 3rd respondent with regard to the land admeasuring about Ac.2.07 Cents of land covered by Survey No.207/1 of Mandadam village of Tulluru Mandal, Guntur District, which is subject matter of an agreement of sale between petitioners and the 3rd respondent. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that 1st petitioner owned an extent of Ac.1.70 Cents of land and the 2nd petitioner owned an extent of Ac.0.37 Cents of land covered by Survey No.207/1 of Mandadam village of Tulluru Mandal, Guntur District. It is stated that the 3rd respondent has initially entered into an agreement of sale with the petitioners on 08.11.2006 and accordingly he purchased the above said land for a total consideration of Rs.86,70,000/- and paid Rs.20,00,000/-. As the 3rd respondent has failed to pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.66,70,000/- within three months as per the agreement dated 08.11.2006, a supplemental agreement was entered into between the parties on 15.02.2007 and later on, the 3rd respondent has paid Rs.40,00,000/-. It is stated that though there is a further balance amount of Rs.26,70,000/- payable towards the sale consideration, at the instance of the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent is interfering in the said dispute and insisting the petitioners to register the property without payment of the balance sale consideration. Precisely, it is the case of the petitioners that though the dispute is of civil nature inter se petitioners and the 3rd respondent, even without there being any complaint before the Police, the 2nd respondent is interfering in the matter. 3. Counter affidavit is filed by one Sri K.Happy Krupavandanam, working as Sub-inspector of Police, IV Town Police Station, Suryaraopet, Vijayawada. In his counter affidavit, the 2nd respondent, while generally denying various allegations of the petitioners, also stated that he never interfered in the civil dispute between the petitioners with the 3rd respondent at any point of time. He stated that this writ petition has been filed with all false allegations. 4. Though no counter affidavit is filed by the 3rd respondent, Sri P.Prabhakara Rao, the learned counsel appearing for him submits that the 3rd respondent has already paid the balance sale consideration and therefore, he may be permitted to take steps in accordance with law for execution of the registered sale deed. He denied the allegation of the petitioners that there is interference by the 2nd respondent in the matter. 5. In view of the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, it is not necessary to go into several factual disputes raised in this writ petition, which are pending between petitioners and the 3rd respondent. But suffice is to say that the 2nd respondent has categorically stated in his counter that he is not interfering with the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and the 3rd respondent. 6. In that view of the matter, placing on record the averment of the 2nd respondent to the effect that he is not interfering in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and the 3rd respondent, I dispose of the writ petition. It is also made clear that if there is any resistance on the part of the petitioners in receiving the balance sale consideration amount for execution of the registered sale deed, it is open for the 3rd respondent to take steps in accordance with law in terms of the agreement entered into between them. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 8th February 2008 ajr