YERRABALLI VENUGOPAL REDDY Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

(2.) a) The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that one Araveeti Krishnamma (mother of R5 and R6) and respondent Nos.7 and 8 herein filed O.S. No. 45 of 1999 against the petitioner herein and others on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, seeking partition of scheduled land properties and to allot 1/5th share in the plaint schedule properties etc. On contest, preliminary decree was passed allotting 1/5th share to plaintiff No.1, 1/5th share to plaintiff Nos.2 and 3 and 3/5th share to the defendant No.1(petitioner in the writ petition).

(3.) Counter is filed on behalf of respondent 4. It was contended, inter alia, that the unofficial respondents made a representation stating that a decree was passed in the suit O.S.No.45 of 1999 filed by them, allotting 2/5 share in the suit properties to them and the appeal in A.S.No.5 of 2010 filed by the petitioner was also dismissed and hence requested for mutation of their names in revenue records. Upon receipt of the representation of unofficial respondents, notice was served to the writ petitioner, affording an opportunity for response. During the hearing, the petitioner submitted that a stay was granted by the High Court in S.A. No. 144/2016. 4th respondent Tahsildar after obtaining legal advice from Assistant Government pleader, Madanapalle, proceeded with enquiry and mutated the names of the unofficial respondents, subject to the outcome of the pending appeal. However, due to the interim stay granted by the High Court in the present writ petition, no further action has been undertaken. Eventually prayed to dismiss the writ petition.