Telangana High Court Slaps Rs 1 Crore Penalty on Petitioner
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Telangana High Court has imposed a Rs 1 crore fine on Venkatrami Reddy for misleading the court regarding land ownership claims in Hyderabad's Kandikal village. The court found that he concealed prior legal disputes and attempted to encroach on government land with false documents.
Key Takeaways
- Heavy fine imposed for misleading the court.
- Concealment of previous cases led to penalties.
- Petitioner claimed ownership of 9.11 acres in Bandlaguda.
- Government proved the land did not exist as claimed.
- False documentation was a key factor in the ruling.
Hyderabad, March 18 (NationPress) The Telangana High Court on Tuesday imposed a significant penalty of Rs 1 crore on a petitioner for misleading the court.
The petitioner, Venkatrami Reddy, was ordered to pay this fine for concealing information about prior cases related to the same issue.
Justice Nagesh Bhimapaka delivered the ruling after determining that Venkatrami Reddy attempted to mislead the court by failing to disclose details of earlier cases.
He asserted ownership of 9.11 acres in Kandikal village, located in Bandlaguda mandal within the Hyderabad district. The petitioner brought his complaint to the High Court, alleging that officials were not registering the land under survey numbers 310/1 and 310/2 in his name. His counsel, Kandagatla Dheeraj, requested court directives to the revenue officials for registering the land in his client’s name.
The counsel also highlighted that the Bandlaguda tehsildar had issued a letter indicating that the registration of the land would not be permitted. The court was asked to issue orders for the officials to permit registration and a sale deed concerning the land in question.
However, the government counsel informed the court that the survey numbers cited by the petitioner do not exist in Kandikal village. It was indicated that the numbering in that area concludes at 309/5. There were allegations that the petitioner was attempting to encroach upon government land by fabricating documents.
Additionally, the government counsel revealed that Venkatrami Reddy’s father had previously filed two similar petitions regarding the same land, both of which were later withdrawn. This fact was not disclosed in the petitioner’s affidavit.
The court concurred with the government counsel’s assertion that the petitioner was trying to seize government land through false documentation and had withheld essential information regarding ongoing legal disputes.
Justice Bhimapaka ruled that the petitioner had misled the court and wasted judicial resources. Consequently, the judge imposed a fine of Rs 1 crore on the petitioner.
