HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18543 of 2010 Date : 01.03.2011 Between : Sri. M.Tirupathaiah & others. …..Petitioners And The Station House Officer, Kulkacherla Police Station & another. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.18543 of 2010 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent No.1 in interfering with the civil disputes existing between petitioners and respondent No.2, and forcing them to deliver possession of land admeasuring Ac.3.28 gts., in Sy.No.141, situated at Kusumasamudram village of Kulkcherla Mandal, Rangareddy District, to the 2nd respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction. It is the case of the petitioners that they are in possession of the aforesaid property and when there was an interference by the 2nd respondent, they filed a suit in O.S.No.43 of 2009 on the file of the Junior Civil judge, Pargi, and obtained injunction orders in I.A.No.190 of 2009. It is stated that after filing of counter by the 2nd respondent, the said I.A. was dismissed by an order, dated 12.10.2009, and in view of dismissal of the said I.A., the 1st respondent is interfering with the possession of petitioners and coercing them to deliver possession of property to the 2nd respondent. In the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, it is stated that he is in possession of the property in question and in view of dismissal of I.A., the present writ petition is filed, making false allegations. It is stated that the property in question was purchased by him, by way of an agreement of sale, dated 10.08.1979, and further, regular sale deed was executed in his favour on 22.05.1996, and as such, there is no truth in the allegation of petitioners that the 1st respondent is trying to coerce them to deliver possession to him. The learned Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that there is no interference by the Police and there is also no complaint by the petitioners to that effect. It is submitted that earlier, there was a complaint by the 2nd respondent, based upon which, a crime was registered in Crime No.83 of 2007, for the offences under Sections 447, 341, 506 and 188 of IPC, wherein, the charge sheet was already filed and the matter is pending trial in C.C.No.212 of 2007, before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pargi. In view of rival claims with regard to possession of property in question, and in view of pendency of civil suit filed by the petitioners, it is not desirable for this Court to record any finding with regard to possession of property. As much as it is stated that the 1st respondent is not interfering with the civil dispute existing between petitioners and the 2nd respondent, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, placing such statement of the 1st respondent on record. It is made clear that this Court has not recorded any finding with regard to possession of property which is the subject matter of civil proceedings and it is for the competent civil Court to record its finding with regard to possession, based on the evidence on record. Subject to the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________________ 1st March 2011 R. SUBHASH REDDY, J ajr