Telangana High Court
WP/9065/2005 of Kunta Bhumeshwar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 24 December 2007
SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WPMP.No.9073 of 2006 AND WRIT PETITION No.9065 of 2005 Date: 24.12.2007 Between: Kunta Bhumeshwar … Petitioner AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government, Irrigation & Command Area, Secretariat Buildings,
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDYWPMP.No.9073 of 2006ANDWRIT PETITION No.9065 of 2005Date: 24.12.2007Between:Kunta Bhumeshwar… PetitionerANDThe State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by itsPrincipal Secretary to Government,Irrigation & Command Area,Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad,Hyderabad & others.… RespondentsCounsel for the petitioner : NoneCounsel for respondent No.4: Sri B. Vijaya Bhaskar for Sri Muralidhar Reddy THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WPMP.No.9073 of 2006ANDWRIT PETITION No.9065 of 2005
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:-
WPMP.No.9073 of 2006 is filed to record the terms ofcompromise and dispose of the writ petition in accordance with thesaid compromise.
A perusal of the record shows that on 20.03.2006 thepetitioner, respondent No.4 and their counsel executed acompromise memo, which reads as under:
“It is submitted that the parties have agreed to the shareof the compensation amount. The parties shall takesteps for sending the reference to the court accordinglyfor enhancement of compensation amount. As theparties are compromised with the compromise in theabove petition, the parties are amicably settled the matterout of the Court.
Hence, it is prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may bepleased to record the terms of compromise and disposeof the writ petition accordingly and pleased to pass suchother order or orders as deem fit and proper.”
At the hearing, there is no representation for the learnedcounsel for the petitioner, but on an earlier occasion Sri C.Ramesh Sagar was present and requested this Court to dispose ofthe writ petition in terms of the compromise memo. As counsel forrespondent No.4 was not present on that occasion, the case is posted for today. Today, Sri B. Vijaya Bhaskar representing Sri K.Muralidhar Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.4 submittedthat he has no objection for disposal of the writ petition in terms ofthe compromise memo.
In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of in termsof the said compromise memo with the direction that the saidmemo shall form part of this order. WPMP.No.9073 of 2006 isordered accordingly.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition in the mannerindicated above, WPMP.No.11919 of 2005 filed by the petitionerfor interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
Date: 24.12.2007ES
____________________________
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J