IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.4705 of 2000 Between: P. Ravinder, S/o. Venugopal Rao, R/o. Pochamma Bagh, Saroornagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2 A. kannabiran, S/o. Manivannan, R/o. 1-11-252/49, Motilalnagar, Begumpet, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a Writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the order of the First Respondent in No. 191/TP7/CCP/99-21/906, dated 15.3.2000 as illegal and arbitrary and beyond the powers of the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: SMT.KALPANA EKBOTE The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ESWAR} THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.4705 of 2000 ORDER: Heard both the counsel. The petitioner questions the order of the 1st respondent dated 15.03.2000 in canceling the building permission granted earlier in favour of the petitioner vide permit No.116/58 dated 25.10.1999 in file No.191/TP7/SD/CCP/99 on the ground that there is a dispute with regard to title of the property bearing House No.12-11-520/A in Sy.No.33(P) situated at Warasiguda, Secunderabad between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent. It is stated that the 2nd respondent filed registered sale deed to prove that he purchased the same from its original owner, but whereas the petitioner did not file any title deeds to prove his title over the disputed property. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent has also filed an application for grant of building permission and the said application was considered and the 2nd respondent was called upon to pay the required charges for grant of permission, and therefore, the permission granted earlier in favour of the petitioner is cancelled. The learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the son of the 2nd respondent filed O.S.411/1999 for grant of permanent injunction on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and the said suit was decreed. As there is a dispute with regard to right and title over the disputed property in between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, I am not inclined to express any opinion with regard to invalidity or validity of the sale deed relied on either by the petitioner or by the 2nd respondent. When there is a title dispute, unless the title dispute is decided by the competent civil Court jurisdiction, it may not be just and proper to interfere with the order of the 1st respondent in canceling the building permission granted earlier in favour of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, I do not see any reasons or merits in this writ petition, and accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J Dated: 03.04.2008 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Rep. by its Commissioner, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 2. 2CCs to 3. 2CD copies