Telangana High Court

WP/24629/2004 of Mr. Arjun Bajaj, Vs Municipal Corporation, on 29 December 2004

COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 24629 of 2004 Between: Mr. Arjun Bajaj,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.H.S. ANSARI

AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO : 24629 of 2004

Between:

Mr. Arjun Bajaj, S/o. Shantilal Bajaj,R/o. Bombay, Rep. by GPA Naidu Sandeep Reddy, S/o. Naidu Varda Reddy, aged about 30 Years, General Manager, Palm Beach Hotel, Beach Road, Visakhapatnam.

AND

..... PETITIONER

Municipal Corporation, Rep. by Commissioner, Visakhapatnam.

.....RESPONDENT

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue awrit, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring theattachment notice dated 21-12-2004 issued by the respondent corporation as arbitrary,illegal, and opposed to directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court and consequently directthe respondent not to attach the property belonging to the petitioner.

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.T.S.ANAND

Counsel for the Respondent: MR.T.S.VENKATA RAMANA

The Court at the admission stage made the following :

O R D E R

Page 1 of 2

(Per Sri Justice M.H.S.Ansari)

Petitioner in the instant writ petition has questioned the attachment notice on the ground thatthe same is contrary to the interim orders dated 09.03.1993 passed in CMP No.20 of 1992in CMP No.976 of 1993 in A.S.No.5 of 1992.

We are of the view that if the alleged impugned action of attachment is contrary to theinterim orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid proceedings, it is open to the petitionerto make appropriate application in the aforesaid proceedings pending before the Court.

It is considered neither prudent nor proper for this Court in writ jurisdiction to deal with amatter, which is already subject of certain proceedings pending on the file of this Court.

admission stage with liberty to the petitioner to seek such appropriate remedy in thepending appeal, as the petitioner may be advised.

------------------------------

JUSTICE M.H.S.ANSARI

29[th] December, 2004

-------------------------------------------JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO

Note: Issue C.C. on priority basis.

(B/O) PGS

1. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam.

2. 2 CD copies.

M.H.S.ANSARI

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICEELIPE DHARMA RAO

W.P.NO.24629 OF 2004(Per Sri Justice M.H.S.Ansari)

29[th] December, 2004

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…