LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/indu-bai-ors-vs-state-of-telangana-ors-20200121/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

Indu Bai & Ors. vs State of Telangana & Ors.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
21 January 2020
Case No.
Civil Appeal No. 483 of 2020
Result
Disposed
Bench
L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta
Citation
[2020] 1 S.C.R. 453 : 2020 INSC 63
Supreme Court Reports [2020] 1 S.C.R. 453 : 2020 INSC 63
Headnote

Tenancy:

Allotment of land in question – To persons displaced after partition of India-Pakistan – Challenged by State Government – Also challenged by appellants claiming to be pre-partition tenants – High Court upheld the challenge by the State Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: The challenge in the writ petition of the appellants before High Court was not to seek establishment of any right of the appellant being pre-partition tenants – Therefore, the matter is remitted to High Court to decide the writ petitions in accordance with law.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by HEMANT GUPTA, J. 1. The present appeals are directed against a common order passed by the High Court of Judicature for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad on 12th February, 2016 whereby the writ petitions filed by the State of Telangana were allowed. 2. Civil Appeal No. 7477 of 2019 (Ramesh Parsram Malani & Ors. v. The State of Telangana & Ors.) arising out of the said order stands dismissed by this Court on 22nd October, 2019 wherein it has been held that the Central Government has transferred land to the State Government and t
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →