THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.33437 of 2010 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the third respondent. This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of respondents 1 and 2 in interfering with the civil disputes and preventing the petitioners from enjoying the property covered by Survey Nos.5-1 and 5-2 admeasuring Ac.1.54½, 77-1/2, 77-2/2, 77- 1/3; Ac.0.58 198-1; Ac.0.22, 5-2 Ac.0.61, 19-7 Ac.0.24, 9-3 Ac.0.40, 24-4 Ac.0.26, 17-2 Ac.0.60, 24-6 Ac.0.241/2, 57-2 Ac.0.59 and S.No.35-2A Ac.0.90 situated at Padamatikambhampadu Village, Anantasagaram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioners that when there was interference by the third respondent and others with regard to some of the properties mentioned above, the first petitioner filed O.S.No.160 of 2010 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Atmakur and obtained injunction orders in I.A.No.385 of 2010 and they are in force. It is the grievance of the petitioners that in spite of such injunction orders, respondents 1 and 2 are interfering and preventing them to enjoy the above said properties contrary to the injunction orders passed by the civil Court. Based on written instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 and 2 that one Smt.Duggireddy Ramanamma, who is the mother of the third respondent herein, has approached P.S.Somasila on 23.12.2010 and lodged a complaint against the petitioners and others stating that herself and her family members were constructing a house in their site by engaging masons and coolies and on 22.12.2010, the petitioners and others trespassed into the site highhandedly and tried to close the trenches which were dug for laying foundation and that the second petitioner embraced her and the first petitioner torn her jacket and that based on the said allegations, a case in Crime No.24 of 2010 was registered for the offences under Sections 143, 447, 354, 341 IPC read with 149 IPC. It is further submitted that the petitioners are A.1 and A.5 and have filed Crl.M.P.No.1530 of 2010 for anticipatory bail but it was dismissed so far as they are concerned. It is also submitted that except investigation into the above said crime, respondents 1 and 2 have not interfered with the right of the petitioners over the properties, which are mentioned in the prayer portion of the writ petition. On the other hand, it is submitted by Sri P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the third respondent that the third respondent is in possession of house property covered by Survey No.19/1 admeasuring 35 cents and only to defer the investigation, the petitioners filed this writ petition by making false allegations and that the third respondent is not concerned with any other properties as claimed by the petitioners in the writ petition. When there is a complaint filed by the mother of the third respondent, it is the duty of the police to investigate into the same and such investigation cannot be termed as interference. Although the third respondent is claiming possession of the structures covered by the land in Survey No.19/1, it is not possible for this Court to record any finding with regard to possession thereof. Recording the submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 and 2 based on the written instructions that except making investigation into Crime No.24 of 2010, respondents 1 and 2 have not prevented the petitioners from enjoying the properties in question and not interfered with their possession, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 9th FEBRUARY, 2011. kvni