Lqbal Ahmed v. Azeemuddin

[ 3304 ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RA'ESHWAR RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO:.412OF 2025 Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of lndia aggrieved by the order dated 06-11-2O25 passed in O.S.CFR No.3652 ot 2025 on the file of the Court of the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Sangareddy. Between:

1. lqbal Ahmed, S/o Late Abdul Aziz, aged about 69 years, Occ- Milk Vendor, Rl/o H.No. 17 -8-299, Nade Ali Baig Chowni, Yakutpura, Hyderabad- 500023 T.S.

2. Arifunnisa Begum, daughter of Fatima Bee aged about 55 years, Occhomemaker, Rl/o Flat No. 1404,Saket Apartment, Summa B Block, Saket Road, Kapra VTC Secunderabad,500062 T.S.

3. Akhil Ahmed, son of Fatima Bee, aged about 41 years, Occ- business, Rl/o Venkat Ram Reddy Nagar, Qutbullahpur, Rangareddy 500055 T.S.

4. Mohd Khaleel Ahmed, son of Fatima Bee, aged about 45 years, Occbusiness, Rl/o Flat No. 302, SSV Residency, R.R Nagar, Old Bowenpaily Ghousia Nagar Masjid Tirumaligiri, Bowenpally, Hyderabad T.S 50001 1.

5. Rafia Sultana, D/o of Fatima Bee, aged about 53 years, Occ- homemaker, Rio 28196,Gandhinagar,Qutbullapur Rangareddy, T.S.

6. Mohd. Asma Begum, D/o Fatima Bee, aged about 52 years, Occhomemaker, R/o H.No. 12-2-838197, near Milon Talkies, Asifnagar 500028, Hyderabad T.S.

7. Ayesha Siddiqua, D/o Fatima Bee, aged about 39 years, Occ- homemaker, Fl/o H.No. 2-7-1z3,Berers Line,Sikh Village Tirumalgiri, Hyderabad- 500009 T.S.

8. Shaik Nazir, S/o Mahboob Bee, aged about 60 years, Occ- business, Rl/o H.No. 5-3/3, Digwal Village, Kohir Mandal, Digwal, Sangareddy- 502321 , T.S.

9. Shaik Shafiuddin, S/o Mahboob Bee, aged about 59 years, Occ- business, Fl/o H.No.1-38-1525, Digwal Village, Kohir Mandal, Digwal, Sangareddy50232'1, T.S. 10.Shaik Fasiuddin, son of Mahboob Bee, aged about 49 years, Occ- business, Ryo H.No.3-77l1, Digwal Village, Kohir Mandal, Digwal, Sangareddy- 502321, T.S.

11. Kota Banu Bi, D/o Mahboob Bee, aged aboul TT years, Occ- homemaker, Rl/o H.No.3-77lA, Digwal Village, Kohir Mandal, Digwal, Sangareddy- 502321, T.S.

l2.Waheeda Begum, D/o Mahboob Bee, aged about 36 years, Occhomemaker,. R/o H.No.9-98/2, Tigawadi, KohiiMandat, Sangareddy- SO221O, T,S 13 Shakeera Bee, D/o Mahboob Bee, aged about 50 years, Occ_ homemaker, R/o H.No. 1-38-556, lndirraamma Nagar, Rasootpura, Secu nderabad_s0OOoi T,S, l4.Zaheeda Bee, W/o Shabber Ahmed, aged about 50, Occ_ homemaker, Rt/o Digwal Village, Zaheerabad Taluka Medak District T.S. 1s.Abeda Bee, W/o Zamee, aged about 50 years, Occ_ homemaker, Ryo Cheelapalli Village, Jharasangam Mandal, Medak Dishict T.S. 16.Zakiya Bee, W/o Aleemuddin, aged about 45 years Occ_ homemaker, R/o Hyderabad C/o lqbal Ahmed (Brother petilioner No.1 H.No.17_8_299 Nade A.4 Baig Chwari yakutpura, Hyderabad.

17.Sabera Bee, W/o Mohmood yousuf Ali, aged about 45 years, Occ_ homemaker R/o Suraram Vi age, Sadashivpet T-tuka, lr.4edak Disirict T.S.

18. Jameela Bee. w/o Khade Miya, aged about 45 years, occ- homemaker Rl/o Digwal Village, Zaheerabad Taluka, Medak Distriat T.S l9 fi4ohammed Muzzamir Ahmed, son of Mahboob Bee, aged about 59 years, resident of H.No.7-16716 _prot No.12, Ghorinagar neai masjid Bowenpaly Thirumalagiri, Bowenpalty District Hyderabad _50-OO1 1,T.S AND ... petitioners/plaintiffs No.l to 19

1. Azeemuddin, S/o Ameenuddin, aged about not known Occ_ Govt. Servant, R/o Kaveli Village, Medak District.

2. Ruksana Begum, D/o Maslan Bee aged about not known, years, Occ_ Household Rt/o- Rahmath Nagar, yousuiGuda, Hyderabad. 3- Farzana Begum, D/o lvrastan Bee aged about not known occ- Househord, R/o- Rahmath Nagar, Yousuf Guda, Hyderabad.

4. Mohammed Waseem Ahmed, S/o Mastan Bee aged about not known, Occ_ Household Rl/o- Rahmath Nagar, yousuf Guda, Hyderabad.

5. Smt. Tahseen Sultana, Wo Md. Hisamuddin, aged about not known, OccHousehold, R/o Kaveli Village, Koheer Mandat, Zaheerabad.

6. Smt. Tahniyat Sultana, W/o- Md Sadath Shareef, aged about not known, Occ- Household, Rt/o Kaveli Village, Koheer Mandal, Zaheerabad

7. Smt Taufeeq Sultana, W/o- Mohammed Maqsood, aged about not known, Occ- Household, Rt/o Kaveli Village, Koheer Mandal, Zaheerabad

8. Haji Bee, D/o- Azeem Bee, aged about not known, Occ_ Household, R/o_ H No. 22-5-52914, Panjesha, Hyderabad

9. Hameeda Begum, D/o-Azeem Bee, aged about not known, Occ_ Household, R/o- H No. 22-5-5291A, panjesha, Hyderabad.

10. Shamshu Bee, D/o- Azeem Bee, aged about not known, Occ_Household, Rl/o_ H No. 22-5-52914, panjesha, Hyderabad.

11. Syed Haneef Begum Jani, D/o- Fatima Bee, aged about not known, Occ_ Household, R/o- H No. 2Z-5-S29tA, panjesha, Hyderabad. 12.Sri Syed Ha beebudd in, S/o Sri Syed Sadat, aged about not known, Occ_ - Private Employee, Rl/o- H No. g-3-22814t, Rahmitn Nagar, Hyderabad.

13. Sri Fasiuddin, S/o Sri Ameenuddin, aged about not kndwn, occ- Agricurturist, Rt/o-Kavell Vitlage, Kohir Mandal, Medak District.

14. Sri M.A. Rasheed, S/o lsamuddin, aged about not known, Occ- Employee. R/o- Kavell Vrllage, Kohir Mandal, Medak District.

15. Syed Khaja Moinuddin, S/o Sri Syed Sadat Ali, aged about not known, OccAgriculturist, Rl/o-H No. 22-5-5291 A, Panjesha, Hyderabad. 16.Sri Hameeduddin, S/o Ameenuddin, aged about not known, occ- Employee, R/o- Kaveli Village, Kohir Mandal, Medak District.

17. Sri V.Narsimha Rao, S/o- Musalaiah, aged about not known, OccAgriculturist, Ryo-Marpally Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

18. Sri. Mohammed tsmail, S/o- Mohammed Quthbuddin, aged about not known, Agriculturist, Rl/o-Kaveli Village, Kohir Mandal, Medak District.

19. Sri. Mohammed Mohiuddin, S/o- Mohammed Sharfuddin, Age- Unknown, occupation Agriculturist, Rl/o-Machireddypally Village, Kohir Mandal, Medak District.

20.Sri. N. Rama Rao, S/o Koteshwar Rao, Aged about 54 years, Occ- Business, R:/o Chttoorpu Village Gantasaia Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. 21,Sri.N,Ramesh Babu, s/o Nageshwar Rao, aged about 43 years, Occbusiness, Rl/o-H.No.1 1-279, Sanjay Gandhi Nagar, Qutbullapur Municipality, Hyderabad 500055.

22.N. Venkat Rao, S/o Nageshwar Rao, Aged about 58 years, Occ- Business Rl/o H. No. 32-128, Shapur Nagar, Qutbullapur, Hyderabad- 500055

23. Majid Ali Khan, S/o Babu Khan, aged about 39 years, Occupation- Business, Ryo. H.No.9-4-138/4, Khans Villa, Grammar Colony, Tolichowki. Hyderabad, T.S. Passport No.55066960, Presently residing at- Flat No. 403. 79 Radcliffe DR, Halifax, B3M 4P1, Nova Scotia, CANADA.

24.Babu Khan, S/o late. Rahmath Ali Khan, aged about 72 yearc, OccupationRetd. Govt. Employee, R/o. H.No.9-4-138/4, Khans Villa, Grammar Colony, Tolichowki, Hyderabad, T.S.

25.Mohammed Basheer, S/o Mohammed Babu Miya, Aged about 52 years, OccBusiness, Rl/o H. no. 8-3-16912612, Ganga nagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad. 26.M/S RAICHANDANI CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, holding PAN Card a Company duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956, duly registered with the Registrar Of Companies, with its Registered Office at Premises No.2-2-1511117, Ground Floor, Pan Bazar, Secunderabad. Represented by its Director.

27. M/s Singularity Strategic Properties LLP, Registered under the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 Having its office at- Villa No. 13, Aditya Casa Grande,Gandipet Mandal, Narsingi Village, Hyderabad- 5091 02.

...Respondents/Defendants No.l to 27

Counsel for the Petitioners: Sri Syed Hassan Bin Taher Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT

I{YDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJF,SHWAR RAO Dated this the 17th day ofJune, 2026 CRP No.4412 of 2025 Between:

Iqbal Ahmed and others.

.Petitioners/Plaintiffs No. 1 to 19 AND Azeemuddin and others.

Respondents/Defendants No.1 to 27 ORDER:

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the docket order dated 06.11.2025 passed by the Prl. District Judge, Sangareddl., in O.S. CFR No.3652 of 2025. 2.

Heard Sri Syed Hassan Bin Taher, learned ,lounsel for the petitioners.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners instituted er partition suit in O.S. No 255 of I988, which rvas dismissed b1 the trial court. Aggrievect therebv, they preferred A.S.No. 39 of 1994. The appellate court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh

consideration. Upon remand and after conducting a fresh enquiry, the trial court once again dismissed the suit' Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed A'S. No.8 of 2018 on the file of the Sr. Civil Judge at Za!rcerabad, ald the sarne is pending.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that during the pendency of A.S.No.S of 2018, the petitioners instituted the present suit in O'S. CFR No. 3652 of 2025 seeking the relief of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents/ defendants, their agents, servants, next friend or any person acting through or under them from transferring/ alienating and I or. encumbering f creating third party interest in respect of the suit schedule property' However, the plaint was returned by the trial Court raising an objection as to how the suit was maintainable during the pendency of A.S.No. 8 of 2018. Thereafter, the petitioners represented the plaint explaining the maintainability of the suit and requested that the matter be placed before the Bench for appropriate orders.

5. The learned tnal judge, while rejecting the plaint observed as follows:

". . . The suit fiied bg the plai.nttffs herein is for partition, the suit wcts dismissed and appeal is pending, duing the pendency of the appea| f.led lhrs sLil fc;r pennanent injutction Jor the same properties.

It is require,cl to mention here that the relief :;ought bg ung of permanent inptnction is "to restrctin the respondertts, their agents, seruants etc., from transferrirtg and alienating the suit schedule propertLt 1,, 3"t parties", Llhich can be sought in the pencling A.5.. the said relief itself is not the main retieJ.

Thus, the plaint does not state facts, if it p.6u.6, tLtould giue the plainttlJs th.e ight to sale. TL,.ere is no cduse oJ actlon to Jile the suit. Henc,?, the pLaint is re jected."

6.

A perusal of the docket order dated O6.ll.2O2S reveals that the petitioners had earlier instituted a suit for partition against the respondents in respect of the suit property. The said suit \l,.as dismissed, and the petitioners/plaintiffs thereafter preferred an appeal challenging the dismissal. While the appeal concerning the suit property was pending, and \.\'itho Llt pursuing th e matter to its logicai concl usion therein, the plaintiffs. fullv a,,r.are of the pendency of the Erppeal and the issues 'involved. instituted another suit against the same respondents seeking ro restrain them from alienating the suit propert\.. If that be so, the petitioners \1'ere at libertv to seek

appropriate relief by filing an application in the pending first appeal itself. There was no necessity to institute a separate suit in respect of the very sarne property against the same respondents. The filing of the subsequent suit appears to be an attempt to prolong the litigation and keep the dispute alive without obtaining any substartive order against the respondents. No fresh cause of action has been shown to justify the inqtitution of a second suit concerning the same propert5z. In such.qircumstances, the observations made by the tria-l Court do not warralt any interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition is devoid of merit and is iiable to be dismissed 7 .

Accordingly, the Civil Revision petition is dismissed by confirming the docket order dated 06.ll.2025 passed by the Prl. District Judge, Saagareddy, in O.S. CFR No.3652 of 2025. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/- P.C. SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Sangareddy.

2. One CC to Sri Syed Hassan Bin Taher, Advocate [OPUC]

3. Two CD Copies KAM/Sa q (

HIGH COURT DATED: 171061202b F TT:

o c

ORDER

CRP.No.4412 of 2025 +c to l!

H0tH DISMISSING THE GRP ii,:

):-, ; 1-t .\\t\