Hyderabad: Telangana high court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a businessman seeking to claim ownership of over one acre of land at Road No. 14, Banjara Hills.Rejecting the plea alleging govt interference, Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty held that the petitioner, Syed Abdul Khalid, had approached the court by suppressing facts.The court also dismissed the connected contempt case and imposed a ₹10,000 fine, directing payment to the high court legal services committee.Khalid filed the petition in 2019, seeking protection against alleged interference by revenue authorities, claiming rights over the land (4,865 square yards) based on a 1969 sale deed. He further alleged that officials violated an interim order by erecting a govt signboard on the property.The govt contended that the petitioner was attempting to grab the land using forged and fabricated documents.Upon examining the submissions, the high court found that the petitioner’s claim was based on an unregistered document that had only been impounded for deficit stamp duty and could not be treated as a valid registered sale deed conferring title.“He also failed to produce the title document of his vendor and had wrongly projected the impounded document as a registered conveyance,” the court observed.Referring to a joint survey conducted pursuant to its directions, the court noted that the petitioner’s claimed land and the govt land were separate parcels.“The survey established that the govt signboard had been erected on govt land and not on the property claimed by the petitioner, thereby eliminating the very basis of his grievance,” the court said.The court further held that the petitioner had misrepresented the nature of the document and attempted to mislead the court.Citing Supreme Court rulings, it reiterated that a litigant invoking writ jurisdiction must make full and truthful disclosure of all material facts, and that one who approaches the court with unclean hands is not entitled to equitable relief.Concluding that the petitioner failed to establish either title or any interference with possession, the court dismissed both the writ petition and the contempt case, with costs.
