M.Venkataramana Reddy vs. Gajula Satyanarayana

Court:High Court of Andhra Pradesh

Judge:Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari

Case Status:Disposed

Order Date:20 Mar 2023

CNR:APHC010127692023

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Get a certified copy of this order

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER
1.	20.03.2023	DVSS, J<br>& SV,J

		After hearing the learned counsel for the
		appellant, this Court notices that of all the
		points made, one issue deserves consideration.
		The trial Court relied upon the order passed in
		W.P.No.15418<br>of<br>2022<br>to<br>hold<br>that
		constructions<br>being<br>made<br>are<br>not<br>illegal
		constructions, since there is an order by this
		Court.<br>However in the affidavit filed in support
		of the interlocutory application, it is clearly
		avoid<br>that<br>this<br>writ<br>petition<br>has<br>been
		withdrawn<br>but<br>the<br>construction<br>was
		continued. This aspect is not noticed by the
		Trial Court. The suit also contains a prayer for
		mandatory<br>injunction<br>for<br>removal<br>of<br>the
		construction already made.
		Learned counsel for the appellant argues
		that construction is not completed and that
		when the suit is<br>filed, construction was at a
		preliminary stage.
		To ascertain this issue, this court is of
		the opinion that<br>an<br>Advocate Commissioner is
		to be<br>appointed<br>to inspect the suit schedule
		property<br>and<br>also<br>the<br>current<br>stage<br>of
		construction.
		Sri P. Sai Surya Teja, learned Advocate
		is appointed as an advocate commissioner and

SL.<br>NO.	DATE	ORDER	OFFICE<br>NOTE
		his fee is<br>fixed tentatively at<br>Rs.20,000/-. He is
		directed<br>to inspect the suit schedule property
		and<br>file<br>a<br>detailed<br>report<br>along<br>with
		photographs.<br>The<br>inspection<br>should<br>be
		confined<br>to<br>the constructions that are made in
		the plaint schedule property.
		List on 31.03.2023.
		In the meanwhile, learned counsel for
		the appellant is permitted to take out personal
		notice to respondent Nos.1 to 3 by RPAD and
		file proof of service in the Registry.
		Advocate<br>commissioner<br>is<br>also<br>given
		liberty to serve notice on respondent Nos.1 to 3
		before execution of warrant.

		__________<br>DVSS,J
		_________<br>SV,J
		AG