HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21244 of 2009 Dated: 24-06-2010 Between: Devarapu Venkateswarlu. … Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Nellore & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21244 of 2009 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents 1 to 4 in interfering with the civil dispute and making efforts to evict the petitioner from the house bearing D.No.16- 1602 (Old 448/41 C), with Assessment No.10311019477, situated at Ramoorthy Nagar of Nellore town, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased the aforesaid property, which is situated within the limits of Municipal Corporation of Nellore, through a registered sale deed, from one Papineni Pramelakumari W/o.Late Paramkusa Rao, and Smt.P.Ravathi Devi W/o.Srinivasa Rao, on 01.09.2009, and possession was delivered to him on the said date. That being so, it is the grievance of the petitioner that at the instance of private individuals, respondents 2 and 3 are interfering with his possession over the said property, to favour respondents 5 and 6 herein. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondent No.3. In the counter affidavit, while denying the various allegations made by the petitioner, it is pleaded that the Police are not interfering with the civil dispute of the petitioner herein, and that all the allegations made by the petitioner are false and incorrect. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 and 6 that the petitioner is not in actual and physical possession of the property, as the vendors of the petitioner have filed a suit in O.S.No.34 of 2001 on the file of the learned III Additional District Judge, Nellore, seeking declaration and recovery of possession, as such, on the date of sale, the vendors of the petitioner were not in possession of the property and the petitioner was not delivered possession, as alleged by him. In view of the pendency of civil disputes with regard to the subject property, it is not desirable for this Court to record any finding with regard to the title and possession of the same, but in this case, as the specific allegation is only against respondents 2 and 3, and in view of the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.3 to the effect that he is not interfering with the civil dispute, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition, placing on record such statement made by the 3rd respondent. However, it is made clear that this Court has not indicated possession of any party over the property in question. It is open for the civil Court, where the dispute is pending, to adjudicate on the title over the property. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 24th June 2010 ajr