Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.
M/s Kaushik Coop. Building Society – Appellant(s)
Versus
N. Parvathamma & Ors. – Respondent(s)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5113 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.26925 of 2010) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5116 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.1632 of 2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5117 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.7713 of 2008) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5118-5119 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.23724-23725 of 2008) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5120-5126 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos.27319-27325 of 2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5128 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.26142 of 2011) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5130 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.29328 of 2010) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5131 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.26140 of 2011) CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.118/2013 in SLP (C) No.26140/2011
Decided On : 11-04-2017
(1975) 4 SCC 690; AIR 1977 SC 1268 : (1977) 2 SCC; AIR 1916 PC 78; (1970) 1 SCC 673; AIR 1976 SC 1569 : (1976) 4 SCC 780 181 – Relied upon
(b) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 11 – Instantly matter in issue in the pending suit and previous decided suits not merely identical but very same – Other ingredients of res judicata also fulfilled – Earlier suit operates as res judicata. (Para 19)
Facts of the case:
One V.R.K. Shastry had purchased the land from one Md. Moulana vide agreement dated 29.12.1963. A suit for specific performance of the said agreement having been dismissed, V.R.K. Shastry filed an appeal before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which was allowed and the suit for specific performance was decreed.
After obtaining the decree V.R.K. Shastry applied for exemption under the ULC Act which was granted. Part of said land was purchased by the appellant society and Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad sanctioned layout in favour of the appellant society for development of 7.00 acres of land out of 12 acres 9 guntas in Survey No.129/68 Paiki. Rest of the portion in the above said decreetal land was assigned to one V. Narsimha Reddy and others under the Assignment Deed dated 15.01.1988. Later, 41 sale deeds were registered in favour of the assignees.
Between year 1989 and 1996, three different land grabbing cases were filed in the Special Court against the appellant society by the legal representatives of deceased Md. Moulana, Sai Nagar Housing Co-operative Society and the State of Andhra Pradesh. All the land grabbing cases were dismissed and when a batch of writ petitions were filed in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the same were dismissed.
One K. Balram and few others filed another Land Grabbing Case before the Special Court in respect of Land in Survey No.129/52, RS No.327, claiming that he and other members of the Hindu Joint Family, he as the manager, had purchased the disputed property under the registered Sale Deed dated 25.03.1967 from one of the legal representatives of Md. Moulana, namely, Abdul Rub. The above-noted purchaser/ assignee of the land, namely, V. Narsimha Reddy was impleaded in the said case and the applications filed by the said V. Narsimha Reddy and the appellant herein, for quashing of LGC No.44/2000 on the ground of maintainability, were dismissed.
The appellant herein and the above named V. Narsimha Reddy filed Writ Petition which were dismissed.
Finding of the Court:
Impugned judgment is erroneous.
Result: Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Present appeals have been directed against the common judgment and order dated 6th August, 2010 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Petition Nos.11869 & 11951 of 2010, whereby the writ petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed. The High Court was of the view that “whether filing of LGC is barred by res-judicata or constructive res-judicata is a mixed question of law and fact, which can be decided only on appreciation of evidence led in to the said effect”. The High Court was further of the view that the Special Court constituted under the provisions of A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 (for short “the Act”) did not commit any error in taking cognizance of the case being Land Grabbing Case No.44/2000.
3. Since the present appeals, by special leave, have been filed assailing the same common judgment, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.26925 of 2010 is taken as the main appeal. It is imperative to record brief facts for the disposal of this case, which are as follows:
3.1 One V.R.K. Shastry had purchased the land to an extent of 12 acres 9 guntas out of 16 acres 9 guntas of land in Survey No.129/68 Paiki from one Md. Moulana vide agreement dated 29.12.1963. A suit for specific performance of the said agreement having been dismissed, V.R.K. Shastry filed an appeal before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which was numbered as CCCA No.14 of 1972. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh while allowing CCCA No.14 of 1972 vide judgment and decree dated 26.10.1976 decreed the suit for specific performance wherein it was held that the suit property was comprised in Survey No.129/68 Paiki and not in Survey Nos.139/51 & 129/52 and is separate and distinct land. It is pertinent to mention here that the defendant died during pendency of suit and his legal representatives were impleaded in the aforesaid suit, who had earlier raised the objection of different survey numbers. Subsequently, the decree in CCCA No.14 of 1972 came to be amended by the High Court and the judgment debtors were directed to execute the sale deed in favour of the decree holder or his nominee.
3.2 After obtaining the decree V.R.K. Shastry applied for exemption under the ULC Act. The Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.Ms. No.523 dated 26.03.1979 granted exemption in favour of V.R.K. Shastry. Part of said land was purchased by the appellant society and Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad sanctioned layout in File No.45/layout/8/85 in favour of the appellant society for development of 7.00 acres of land out of 12 acres 9 guntas in Survey No.129/68 Paiki. Rest of the portion in the above said decreetal land was assigned to one V. Narsimha Reddy and others under the Assignment Deed dated 15.01.1988. Later, 41 sale deeds were registered in favour of the assignees, after this Court on 12.09.1994 dismissed SLP(C) No.11381/1994 filed by the judgment debtors and upheld the order of the executing court permitting the assignees to obtain registered sale deeds in their favour. The High Court dismissed the appeal being AAO No.2647/1998 vide its order dated 27.10.1998 and the order of the learned executing court attained finality.
3.3 Between year 1989 and 1996, three different land grabbing cases under the Act were filed in the Special Court against the appellant society by the legal representatives of deceased Md. Moulana, Sai Nagar Housing Co-operative Society and the State of Andhra Pradesh, being LGC No.46/1989, LGC No.29/1992 and LGC No.15/1996 respectively, alleging that the property claimed by the appellant herein was not a part of Survey No.129/68 but that of Survey No.129/51 and 129/52. All the land grabbing cases were dismissed and when a batch of writ petitions were filed in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the same were dismissed vide a common judgmen
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
