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

2008 Supreme(SC) 1262

ARIJIT PASAYAT, MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ.
Ramisetty Naraiah - Appellant
Versus
Poluri Venkata Subbamma & Ors. - Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5193-5195 OF 2008
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 24733-24735 of 2005)
DECIDED ON : 22-08-2008

Headnote:

Andhra Tenancy Act - Section 15 - Seeking temporary injunction - Agreements of sale - Appellant had taken petition schedule lands which are to an extent of Acres cents of agricultural land situated at village District with the following appellant came to know that the husband of 2nd respondent and one were contending that they had purchased the schedule lands from who is the wife of original Landlord and from whose brother the appellant had taken the schedule lands on lease after his death - As respondents were contending that they will evict appellant filed suit O. file of District Munsif against 1st to 3rd respondents herein seeking permanent injunction against them and also filed an I.A. seeking temporary injunction - Held, It clear, it inter-alia provides that notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any pre existing law, custom, usage provides that any sale of the land by the landlord in contravention of Section 15 shall be voidable to the option of the cultivating tenant - High Court has come to an abrupt conclusion that since the agreement to sell was purportedly executed prior to the introduction of the provision they have no relevance. There is no discussion as to the effect of the provisions, and specific reference to agreements. Additionally, the High Court has not dealt with the aspect as to whether it could have gone into the question of default when respondent No. 3 who was shown as the petitioner in the Civil Revision Petition did not want to pursue the petition - Appeals are accordingly Disposed of

JUDGMENT (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)

1. Leave granted.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court allowing the Civil Revision Petitions Nos. 5692 and 5695 of 1998 filed by the respondent while dismissing the CMP No. 6683 of 2005 filed by the appellant.

3. Background facts as projected by the appellant are as follows:

In April, 1975 the appellant herein had taken the petition schedule lands which are to an extent of Acres 5-36 cents of agricultural land situated at Pernamatta village, Santhalapadu, Patta No.2182- Survey No.158/2, Ongole District with the following boundaries - East : Government Donka, South: Land of Inabathana Ramaiah, West : Land of Gajula Kotaiah, North: Land of Adapal Jogaiah and Venkatarao. Since the time he had taken on lease the above mentioned lands, he has been regular in payment of Maktha which is a lump sum amount of Rs.1200/- towards rent per year to the schedule lands.

3.1 In 1979 as the appellant came to know that the husband of 2nd respondent herein i.e Mannam Sundarannaiah and one Adapa Venkatarao were contending that they had purchased the schedule lands from G. Seetharamamma who is the wife of the original Landlord and from whose brother the appellant had taken the schedule lands on lease after his death. As the respondents were contending that they will evict, appellant filed suit O.S No. 791/1979 on the file of District Munsif against 1st to 3rd respondents herein seeking permanent injunction against them and also filed an I.A. No. 3963 of 1979 seeking temporary injunction.

3.2 In the suit for the first time it came to the knowledge of the appellant herein that the 3rd respondent herein, to discharge the debts had agreed to sell the schedule lands to the husbands of the Ist and 2nd respondents herein by way of agreements of sale dated 10.9.1979. Possession continued to remain with the appellant herein and he was cultivating the petition schedule lands.

3.3 On 13.11.1979 the temporary injunction which was granted in favour of the appellant was allowed and the temporary injunction was made absolute, against which an Appeal C.M.A. No. 111/1979 was filed by the 1 to 3 respondent herein in the court of District Court Munsif, Ongole.

3.4 On 01.07.1980 Section 15 was incorporated in the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act, 1956 (in short the `Act).

3.5 On 11.12.1980 the appeal C.M.A. No.111/ 1979 which was filed by the respondents herein challenging the injunction order dated 13.11.1979 was also dismissed.

3.6 On 17.01.1981, the 3rd respondent herein contrary to Section 15 of the Act, sold the Southern half of the schedule lands to the Ist respondent herein and Northern half of the schedule lands to the 2nd respondent herein by executing registered sale deeds. But still the appellant was in possession of the lands and he was cultivating the same.

3.7 On 17.11.1981 the appellant filed A.T.C. (Andhra Tenancy Case) which was numbered in the year 1982 and the number of the case was A.T.C. No.2 of 1982 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Ongole (Special Officer Constituted under Andhra Tenancy Act) and in the A.T.C. he contended that the sales are contrary to Section 15 of the Act and as such they are void and sought declaration from the court (a) that he is entitled to first purchase the schedule lands, (b) that the sale deeds executed on 17.01.1981 are void (c) that respondents should execute proper sale deeds in favour of the appellant and convey the schedule lands to him.

3.8 In ATC 2/1992 the respondents herein filed their counter wherein they contended that the appellant defaulted in payment of rents and they also stated that the schedule property was sold to the respondents 1 and 2 by way of registered sale deeds dt. 17.01.1981.

3.9 On 21.09.1984, the respondents herein filed A.T.C. No. 44 of 1984 under Section 13(a) of Act and sought for eviction of the appellant and delivery of possession of the schedule lands contending























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
whatsapp-icon Back to top