THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31889 of 2011 ORDER: The action of the third respondent, in summoning the petitioners, and compelling the first petitioner to transfer her property to the fourth respondent (daughter-in-law of the first petitioner), is questioned in this Writ Petition as being illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners, four in number, would allege that though the fourth respondent has been residing with the first petitioner even till date, the third respondent was unnecessarily harassing them calling over to the police station despite no complaint having been lodged against them by the fourth respondent. A counter affidavit is filed by the third respondent wherein it is stated that the fourth respondent had initially lodged a complaint against the petitioners; she had requested that the complaint not be registered; and it would suffice if the petitioners were called over to the police station and counselled properly. The allegations, of the petitioners having been called over to the police station, or of the first petitioner being asked to transfer her property in favour of the fourth respondent, are denied by the third respondent. In the light of the specific denial, in his counter affidavit, by the third respondent of the petitioners having ever been called to the Begumpet Police Station, Hyderabad, or to have asked the first petitioner to transfer her property in favour of the fourth respondent, I see no reason to keep the Writ Petition pending on the file of this Court. Since the petitioners’ specific allegations of having been called to the Begumpet Police Station, or the first petitioner having been asked to transfer her property to the fourth respondent, are denied, the Writ Petition is closed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:21.12.2011 usd