P.V. Tirupathi Rao, Sec-Bad. v. Secy., Honble Lok Adalat, R.R. Dist. And 35 ORS.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION Nos.2672, 2760, 6117 and 6135 of 2015 Between:

P.S.Vikram Prashanth and others ..Petitioners and The Lok Adalat, Ranga Reddy District and others ..Respondents Counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.2671 and 2760 of 2015: Mr.T.Surya Satish Counsel for the petitioners in W.P.Nos.6117 and 6135 of 2015: Mr.Venkta Reddy Donthi Reddy Counsel for respondent No.1: Mr.J.Anil Kumar Counsel for private respondents in W.P.Nos.2671 and 2760 of 2015: Mr.Prabhakar Sripada (R-7), Mr.M.S. Prasad-senior counsel for Mr.Anish Satya Kamal(R-24/R-36), Mr.Venkata Reddy Donthi Reddy (R-6), Mr.D.Jai Pal Reddy (R-23/R-33), Mr.M.Karuna Sagar (R-5), Mr.G.Purushotham Reddy (R-4) Counsel for other respondents in W.P.Nos.2671 and 2760 of 2015: None appeared Counsel for private respondents in W.P.Nos.6117 and 6135 of 2015: Mr.Prabhakar Sripada (R-7 and 21), Mr.M.S. Prasad-senior counsel for Mr.Anish Satya Kamal(R-36/R-24) Mr.D.Jai Pal Reddy (R-33/R-23) Mr.M.Karuna Sagar (R-5) Counsel for other respondents in W.P.Nos.2671 and 2760 of 2015: None appeared The Court made the following:

COMMON ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) These writ petitions are filed for certiorari to quash awards, dated 09.04.2008, in O.S.Nos.105 of 2003 and 777 of 2007, and consequential common order, dated 12.09.2014, in P.L.C.Nos.134 and 135 of 2013, passed by respondent No.1.

2.

We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties in extenso.

At the end of hearing, Mr.T.Surya Satish and Mr.Venkat Reddy Donthi Reddy, learned counsel for the respective writ petitioners, submitted that as the assignment deeds and memoranda of understanding, dated 28.01.2004, form basis for passing of the impugned Lok Adalat awards and having regard to the various disputed questions of fact relating to the validity or otherwise of those documents, the writ petitions may be closed, with liberty to the petitioners to avail appropriate legal remedies before the competent Court with respect to those aspects. 3.

Mr.M.S.Prasad, learned senior counsel representing Mr.Anish Satya Kamal, Mr.D.Jaipal Reddy, Mr.G.Purushotham Reddy, Mr.M.Karuna Sagar, Mr.Prabhakar Sripada, learned counsel representing the respective private respondents, have submitted that in the event of initiation of fresh legal proceedings by the petitioners as proposed by them, their clients may be

permitted to raise all the legally permissible defences, including the maintainability of such proceedings.

4.

The request of the learned counsel for the respective private respondents, as noted above, is accepted. These Writ Petitions are closed, without adjudicating the same on merits, however, with liberty to the petitioners in terms of the prayer made. 5.

As a sequel to closure of these writ petitions, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending for consideration stand disposed of as infructuous.

_________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J ____________________________ GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD, J 09th August, 2018 GHN