Legal Briefs | UK murder convict seeks remission

HYDERABAD: Justice C.V. Bhasker Reddy of the Telangana High Court ordered the DG of prisons and correctional services to review a remission plea filed by the parents of Nagaraju Kumar Nalluri, who was convicted for the murder of a fellow student, in Birmingham on May 6, 2008. The prisoner, a former student of the University of Wolverhampton, was arrested by West Midlands police and sentenced to life after he brutally attacked the victim with a dumbbell, striking her at least 12 times on the head following her rejection of his proposal. The UK court sentenced him to a minimum of 25 years before being considered for parole. The prisoner was brought to India for conviction. The parents, who are principals of private junior colleges, filed a petition seeking remission for their son. They alleged that their plea was however been ignored by the Union ministry of home affairs, state legal affairs department and others, leading to filing of the writ plea. The judge directed the DG to review the representation and pass an appropriate order within three weeks.

Do not entertain terrace rights, HC tells sub-registrar

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court directed the sub-registrar, Bowenpally, not to entertain any registrations of the terrace rights on the second floor of Gunrock Gardens in Secunderabad Cantonment Area. The judge made an interim order in a writ petition filed by petitioner in Writ Petition No. 26231 of 2024, challenging the action of the registering authority in registering sale deeds and gift deeds over the terrace portion of the property in question. The petitioner contended that the predecessors of the property were sanctioned building permission for Gunrock Gardens constructed on Plot No. 53 SCB No. 307069 in Survey No. 157/8 in the layout of Gunrock Enclave Cooperative Housing Society situated at Gunrock Enclave Colony, Phase I, Thokatta Village, Secunderabad Cantonment. According to the petitioner, such terrace rights to which flat owners have access cannot be alienated. Justice Shravan Kumar said that the petitioner is entitled to use the terrace as the same would be considered as common area and facilities in terms of Section 3(d)(iii) of the Telangana Apartments (Promotion of Construction and Ownership) Act, 1987. Even as per the clause of the sale deed executed in August 2021 in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner was entitled to enjoy jointly along with other flat owners in the building complex the common conveniences without any hindrance. Thus, in view of the same, the vendors to the document could not sell the terrace. He directed the authorities not to register terrace rights.

No relief for textile outlet in demolition case

Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the actions of the GHMC and its officers in demolishing the staircase in front of Kashish textile showroom situated in Tolichowki, Hyderabad. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by M/s Arif Abdul Sattar Textiles Pvt. Ltd alleging that the respondent authorities demolished the staircase, disconnected the power supply, and sealed the premises without considering the petitioner’s prior representations. The building in question, located at Nizam Colony Yousuf Tekdi, Tolichowki (No. 9476/11), is a decade-old structure with a cellar for parking, four upper floors, and an office on the terrace, occupying approximately 20,000 square feet on a plot of 387 square yards. According to the petitioner, the deputy commissioner of the GHMC initially issued a notice requesting property-related documents, to which the petitioner responded in the capacity of a tenant as the owner remained silent on the issue. The petitioner states that another notice was later issued by the assistant city planner, seemingly disregarding the tenant’s earlier reply. The petitioner alleged that the owner did not take any action regarding these notices. During the hearing, the judge observed that while a landlord cannot use the GHMC Act as a tool to evict a tenant, the building must be demolished if found to be unauthorised. The counsel for GHMC contended that the staircase is an unauthorised, illegal construction and encroached on the public road. After hearing the parties, the judge ordered personal notices to the owner and granted time to file documents supporting the claim that the staircase is not unauthorised. Accordingly, the judge posted the matter for further hearing.

PhD scholar gets bail in extortion case

Justice Juvvadi Sridevi of the Telangana High Court granted anticipatory bail to a student leader and PhD Scholar in Kakatiya University allegedly involved in extortion and cheating. The judge was dealing with an anticipatory bail petition filed by Aluvala Karthik. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner collected an amount of Rs 21,000 from the de facto complainant whose son is involved in a ragging case in SR University. The complainant and others allegedly consulted the petitioner, who is claimed to have political influence and requested for help in the case, who after receiving money falsely promised to convert the big case into a petty case. The petitioner stated that he compromised the matter amicably for the bright future of the students and did not demand any amount from them. The petitioner also pointed out that most part of the investigation in the case was completed, except filing of the chargesheet, and hence, prayed for grant of bail. The judge pointed out that investigation was almost completed and no specific allegations were levelled against the petitioner, deemed that it was a fit case for grant of bail and accordingly, granted conditional bail to the petitioner.

IOCL files appeal on contract renewal

A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao on Tuesday suspended the direction of a single judge requiring IOCL to renew a contract and continue its supply to Leela Gas Agency. The panel passed the interim order admitting a writ appeal filed by IOCL. Earlier a writ plea filed by M/s Leela Gas Agency challenging termination of its distributorship. It was the case of the petitioner that IOCL took on the false complaint filed by K. Prabhakar, managing partner of petitioners gas agency, without conducting proper inquiry and without following due process of law proceeded to terminate the dealership. It is the case of the corporation that the complaint was investigated as per applicable guidelines, and it was found that the petitioner, inter alia, executed registered MOU and GPA, unregistered MOU and GPA and unregistered partnership deed with Prabhakar without taking any permission from the corporation. However, the petitioner was given an opportunity for regularisation of illegal partnership by paying the required ratification fees and seeking condonation of her mistake but the same did not reply. The judge, after perusing the records, arrived at a conclusion that the finding in the impugned order issued by the IOCL that the petitioner had been found guilty of entering into unauthorised set-up by inducting Prabhakar into the distributorship without taking any prior permission of IOCL is factually incorrect. The judge accordingly directed to forthwith restore the petitioner’s gas agency and not to interfere with the business of petitioner without following due process of law. IOCL is against this order. The panel after considering the material on records suspended the direction of the single judge and posted the matter for further adjudication.