Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday set aside a decree in favour of Sahebzadi Hameedunnissa Begum but remanded the second appeal challenging the said decree back to the civil court.
The panel comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar was hearing interlocutory applications filed by the legal representatives of the plaintiff challenging the very filing of the second appeal by Cyrus Investments Ltd through its GPA P.S. Prasad. Hameedunnissa Begum filed a civil suit in 2014 for the cancellation of a registered sale deed said to be executed by her in favour of the Nizam and later by the said Nizam in favour of Cyrus Investments Ltd.
Though the civil suit was dismissed the XI Additional Chief Judge, Hyderabad in December 2023 allowed her to first appeal and decreed the suit. The title of the plaintiff and her possession of the property was upheld by the appellate court judgment.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present second appeal was filed by Cyrus Investments Ltd represented by Dr P.S. Prasad as power of attorney.
In the present interlocutory application, the very maintainability of the second appeal at the insistence of Dr Prasad was questioned by the legal representatives of the plaintiff.
Senior counsel Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for the petitioner, contended that a petition could not have been filed by Cyrus Investments through Dr Prasad since he was neither a director nor an official of Cyrus Investments.
It was also contended that while an application for additional documents as evidence was pending in the appeal the additional chief judge in a mysterious manner allowed the appeal without passing any order on the application for additional evidence.
It is successfully canvased before the panel by Senior Counsel Menaka Guruswamy that there was no effective authorisation to permit Dr Prasad to represent Cyrus Investments Ltd and also that Dr Prasad not being a functionary of Cyrus Investments Ltd could not maintain the second appeal.
The original suit was for cancellation of the sale deed executed by the late Nizam in favour of Cyrus Investments Ltd.
On a detailed consideration of various facts and the law in issue, Justice Sravan Kumar ruled that the first appellant court "should not have proceeded to pronounce the judgment without deciding the application for additional documents."
Menaka Guruswamy also pointed out that the Additional Chief Judge, having adjourned the matter to a specific date for inexplicable reasons delivered the judgment without even passing any orders on the applications for additional evidence which she said was contrary to law.
Speaking for the panel, Justice Shravan Kumar also took cognisance of the interlocutory application where the authorisation of Dr Prasad to represent Cyrus Investments Ltd is in serious challenge.
The panel accordingly remitted the matter back to the district court to consider all the issues with regard to the power of attorney and the application for additional evidence in accordance with law. The legal representative of the original plaintiff Sahebzada Nawab Mohd Moizuddin would state that the properties of about 200 acres were in four villages of Hafeezpet, Hasheempet, Malkaram, and Ghasiagudda.
Transgenders right in TSPSC notification: HC orders notice
Justice Pulla Karthik of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the state government to explain its stance on reservation for transgenders under the public service commission. A batch of writ pleas were filed alleging that the Group-IV notification does not provide for a reservation for transgenders despite the Supreme Court’s direction to all Central and state governments to ensure that transgenders are considered under the socially and educationally backward class and given a reservation. The counsel for petitioner contended that in spite of the Supreme Court’s order the notification does not provide for any reservation for transgenders. The judge directed the General Administration Department and the tribal/social welfare department to file its counter before the next date of hearing. The matter is adjourned to June 10 for further hearing.
HC directs State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited to go for arbitration
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday refused to interfere with a notice issued by Telangana State Cooperative Marketing Federation Limited. A writ plea was filed by Tirupathi Trading Co. who primarily is involved in the business of producing pulses. It was alleged that an arbitration notice was issued to them that the terms and conditions for supply of bengal gram was violated and they have to pay a penal interest. Counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently contended that since an arbitration clause is included in the tender notification, the court does not have power to interfere with the notice issued by MARKFED. The judge affirmed that the High Court does not have jurisdiction to interfere if a dispute resolution mechanism exists between the parties. The judge also directed that MARKFED may consider waiving of penal interest if the petitioners comply with the arbitration notice.
