SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(SC) 146

G.L.OZA, R.B.MISRA
Abhinavodhanda Vidya Sankarabharatt Swamulavaru – Appellant
Versus
Poonapati Ramayogi Reddi – Respondent


Advocates:
A.SUBBA RAO, J.RAMA CHANDRA RAO, K.L.RATHI, K.RAM KUMAR, T.V.S.N.Chari, VRINDA GROVER

JUDGMENT

R. B. MISRA, J.:— The present appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated November 27, 1969. By this judgment a Division Bench of the High Court set aside the order of the learned single Judge, dismissing the petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, and quashed the order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal (District Judge) and remanded the case to the Tribunal for fresh decision according to law on the basis of the materials already on record in the following circumstances.

2. A suo motu inquiry under S. 9(1) of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition And Conversion into Ryotwari) Act was initiated by the Assistant Settlement Officer in 1958 for determining whether Lingamguntla Agraharam is an Inam Estate within the meaning of S. 3(2)(d) of the Madras Estates Land (Third Amendment) Act, 1936. The Assistant Settlement Officer and the Estates Abolition Tribunal held that Lingamguntla Agraharam was not an Inam estate. Later the definition of an Inam Estate was amended in 1957 and after the amendment, an Inam. Estate, as defined by S. 2(7) includes all Estates within the meaning of S. 3(2)(d) of the












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top