Live
- Pentagon official says burden sharing with South Korea is not just about defence spending
- Pakistan braces for more sectarian bloodshed after killing of 43 Shias
- BJP in Tripura doubles its membership: Party leader
- MP bypolls: Congress wins Vijaypur, BJP leading in Budhni
- India’s bilateral trade with ASEAN sees 5.2 pc growth at $73 billion in April-Oct
- Congress won through a flood of money: Bommai
- Congress retains Dausa seat; BJP leader Kirodi Lal Meena's brother loses
- Karnataka bypolls: Congress registers thumping victory in all 3 Assembly seats
- Bihar bypolls: NDA bags all four seats, Mahagathbandhan suffers big defeat
- Assam bypolls: BJP-led alliance set to win all five seats
Telangana: Trial court told to deal with government vacation plea
The Telangana High Court termed with the interim orders passed by a lower court unattractive which allowed the respondent actor Prabhas for temporary...
The Telangana High Court termed with the interim orders passed by a lower court unattractive which allowed the respondent actor Prabhas for temporary possession of a property which the government claims as its own. The High Court Division Bench headed by Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and Justice P Naveen Rao found fault with the lower court's interim injunction order in favour of the respondent-plaintiff Prabhas.
The 2,083-square yard land is located at Pan Maktha in Survey No. 5/3 at Raidurgam of Serlingampally in Ranga Reddy district. Prabhas said years ago he bought the land and has a registered sale deed. Under the regularisation scheme in 2014, the government even accepted his application. He approached the HC in 2018 after the government seized the land challenging the action. The court rejected his petition for granting him possession of the land and ordered the government not to dismantle the building until further orders.
The XV Additional District and Sessions judge cum XV Metropolitan Sessions judge Kukatpally RR district granted an interim injunction in favour of Prabhas till April 3. Due to the continuation of lockdown, all interim orders were extended till June first week. Aggrieved by the trial court's order, the state government filed a petition in the High Court to vacate the order. The CJ Bench observed that the order of the Trial Court is unattractive and possession of the property should not be with Prabhas. Moreover, the court directed the government authorities to restrain from demolishing the suit schedule property.
The Bench directed the trial court to immediately deal with the vacate application filed by the government authorities for vacating the impugned interim injunction order. The said application shall be heard and decided on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible, uninfluenced by any of the observations made by the High Court, it added.
The CJ Bench further said both the parties shall be free to raise their respective contentions before the trial court. It is needless to say that if either of the party is aggrieved by the orders so passed by the learned trial court, they shall be free to challenge the same. With these observations, the High Court bench disposed of the appeal.
