Court reaffirms principle that relief not claimed in writ petition cannot be granted; advises parties to resolve possession dispute through civil court.
In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has set aside a Single Judge's order directing the maintenance of status quo regarding mutation entries in a land dispute case. The decision came in response to a writ appeal filed by V. Chandrasekhar Naidu, challenging the order issued in W.P.No.14219 of 2026, which mandated maintaining the status quo on the mutation of names in revenue records concerning a contested land parcel.
The bench, comprising Justices Ravi Nath Tilhari and Subhendu Samanta, underscored that the relief granted by the Single Judge was beyond the scope of the writ petition, which primarily sought to prevent dispossession of the petitioners from the disputed land pending a statutory appeal. The court emphasized adherence to established legal principles, stating that courts should not grant relief not explicitly claimed in the pleadings.
The case revolves around a land dispute concerning Ac.2.48 cents in Cherlopalle Village, Tirupati District. The writ petitioners alleged attempts to alter revenue records and dispossess them from the land without due legal process. They filed the writ petition to seek protection from eviction pending the resolution of a statutory appeal.
The High Court noted the absence of any specific plea regarding mutation entries in the original writ petition. Citing precedents, the court held that granting relief outside the pleadings is impermissible, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Himachal Pradesh Nizi Vyavsayik Prishikshan Kendra Sangh.
While setting aside the status quo order, the court directed the parties to resolve the possession dispute through civil court proceedings, where an interim injunction already exists. The court allowed the writ petitioners three weeks to approach the civil court to seek appropriate relief.
Furthermore, the court upheld the direction for expeditious disposal of the pending statutory appeal, noting no objection from either party. The ruling reinforces the procedural rigor required in legal proceedings, ensuring that courts operate within the confines of the relief sought by litigants.
Bottom line:-
Relief not claimed in the writ petition cannot be granted; maintaining status quo regarding mutation entries in revenue records without specific relief sought in the writ petition is impermissible.
Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, A.P. Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfer) Act, 1977, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Registration Act, 1908
V. Chandrasekhar Naidu v. E. Muneendra, (Andhra Pradesh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2933181
