Lessees Cannot Use Fresh Writ Petition To Secure Possession After Trust Withdraws SLP: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has set aside Telangana High Court orders that had protected the possession of lessees of M.A. Garden Function Hall in a long-running dispute over land in Hyderabad. The Court held that the lessees could not invoke writ jurisdiction to seek protection of possession when the Trust through which they claimed possession had already pursued the dispute before the courts.

The judgment was delivered by Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar on September 16, 2026.

Background of the Case

The dispute concerns 4,678 square metres of land at Gaganmahal Village, Hyderabad. M/s Kishan Chand Foundation Trust claimed ownership on the basis of a registered sale deed executed in 1968.

In 1997, the Trust received a notice under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905, concerning eviction from the property. Its civil suit was later dismissed, and an appeal was also dismissed for non-prosecution. Proceedings were subsequently initiated under Section 6 of the Act for delivery of possession.

The Trust then approached the High Court. Although a Single Judge initially quashed the eviction proceedings, a Division Bench reversed that decision in September 2022. The Division Bench held that a writ court was not the appropriate forum to determine possession or title where serious factual disputes existed.

The Trust challenged that decision before the Supreme Court. The Special Leave Petition was later withdrawn on September 9, 2025, with liberty to the Trust to pursue a fresh civil suit. The Supreme Court did not grant further interim protection.

Soon after the withdrawal, M.A. Garden Function Hall and other persons claiming to be lessees of the Trust filed writ petitions before the High Court challenging the State authorities' action concerning possession of the premises.

On September 12, 2025, the Single Judge directed that the petitioners should not be dispossessed in the meantime and also directed the Mandal Revenue Officer to unlock the function hall. The State challenged the order, but the Division Bench dismissed the appeals on December 30, 2025.

Supreme Court's Observation

The Supreme Court found that the lessees were claiming possession through the Trust, whose earlier challenge had already ended without disturbing the 2022 Division Bench judgment.

The Court observed:

"Once the High Court has already recorded a finding in Writ Appeal No.1243 of 2005 that it was not open for the writ court to record finding of possession, a second writ petition filed by the lessees only for protection of possession ought not to have been entertained."

The Bench also noted that the fresh writ petitions were filed shortly after the Trust's SLP was withdrawn and observed that the interim relief sought by the lessees was a matter that could be considered by the civil court.

Decision

The Supreme Court set aside the Single Judge's order dated September 12, 2025 and the Division Bench judgment dated December 30, 2025. It did not interfere with the State's action of locking the premises.

The Court recorded that a civil suit had already been filed and was pending before the Trial Court, directing that the suit be decided on its own merits.

The appeals filed by the State of Telangana were accordingly allowed.