IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND NINE WRIT PETITION No.14614 of 2009 Between: Mukkamalla Ramalakshmamma. … Petitioner And: The Sub-Inspector, Gospadu Police Station, Sirvel Mandal, Kurnool District and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri P.Nagendra Reddy. Counsel for the Respondents: A.G.P. for Home for R.1 to R.3. None for R.4. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondents 1 and 2 in interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4 in respect of Ac.4.91 cents of land in Survey No.182/1 and 182/2 of Gospadu village and Mandal, Kurnool District, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner filed O.S.No.342 of 2006 in the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Allagadda, and obtained temporary injunction on 7-11-2007 against respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 and his father also filed O.S.No.67 of 2006 in the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, for specific performance of contract in respect of the same property. The petitioner alleged that while the said civil suits are pending, respondents 1 and 2 have been summoning her to the Police Station and directing her not to cultivate the land, and vacate and deliver vacant possession of the same in favour of respondent No.4. The petitioner further averred that despite her bringing pendency of the civil suits to the notice of respondents 1 and 2, they have continued their interference and threats to the petitioner to vacate the land. Therefore, she filed the present Writ Petition. In the unattested counter-affidavit, to which respondent No.2 deposed, it is, inter alia, stated that on the complaint filed by respondent No.4 against the petitioner and others, a case in Crime No.88 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 307, 354 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC was registered, wherein the petitioner is accused No.2, investigation was held and the case was referred as false on 30-12- 2007. He denied the allegations of interference by him or respondent No.1 and stated that they are not interested in the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4. Having regard to the stand taken by respondents 1 and 2 referred to above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail her remedy, if respondents 1 and 2 cause interference in the civil dispute in future. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:30-7-2009 MNR