IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA WRIT APPEAL No.141 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 31.01.2008 in W.P.No.17327 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Chilkuri Narsimha, S/o.C. Durgaiah R/o. Pet Basheerabad Village, Qutbullapur Mandal, R.R. District. .....Appellant And 1. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The Station House Officer, Pet Basheerabad Police Station, Qutbullapur Mandal, R.R. District. 3. St.Ann's High School, Secunderabad, rep. by its Correspondent. .....Respondents Counsel for the appellant : Sri B. Mahender Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2: Government Pleader for Home Counsel for respondent No.3 : Sri B. Venkat Rama Rao The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (Per Anil R. Dave, C.J.) Heard learned Advocates. It cannot be disputed by anyone that disputed questions of fact were involved in the petition and, therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly rejected the same. It is also pertinent to note that suits on the subject matter of the petition have already been filed and they are pending before the competent civil court. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the proper course for the appellant – original petitioner would be to approach the concerned civil court. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant – original petitioner has submitted that certain observations have been made by the learned Single Judge with regard to possession. We have noted the said fact. The learned Single Judge has observed thus: “In view of the factual disputes with regard to the possession over the land in question, prima facie, it is not possible to accept the possession of the petitioner.” It is very clear that the aforesaid observation is a prima facie observation and if the civil court comes to the conclusion that there is evidence to the contrary, the civil court would not be influenced by the aforesaid observation made by the learned Single Judge. Subject to the aforesaid clarification, the appeal is dismissed. ANIL R. DAVE, C.J. 19th February, 2008 GOPALAKRISHNA TAMADA, J. ........REGISTRAR To 1. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District. 2. The Station House Officer, Pet Basheerabad Police Station, Qutubullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 3. The Correspondent, St. Ann’s High School, Secunderabad. 4. Two copies to Government Pleader for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 5. Two CD copies. ARS