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

2006 Supreme(AP) 499

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : V.V.S.RAO
L.Hassan Khan - Appellant
Versus
Government Of A.P. - Respondent
Decided On : 04-12-06

Headnote:

limitation Act, 1963 - Article 112 - A. P. Rights in Land and pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 - Land Acquisition act, 1894- Section 4 - Acquisition of Land - Sale deed - Pattadar pass books - land was purchased by late under registered sale deed - Enjoying the property along with his three sons and late - After death statedly there was a partition of the properties among the three sons under registered partition deed got Acs. 9. 09 got Acs. 8. 86 and an extent of acs. 8. 00 fell to the share - State acquired about Acs. 1. 06 belonging Acs. 1. 14 belonging and Acs. 2. 63 belonging to Late for laying a bypass road pursuant to a notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition act, 1894 - Owners obtained necessary pattadar pass books and title deeds under the A. P. Rights in Land and pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 - It appears, in transferred the remaining land by way of registered gift deed in favour of third petitioner - Further, got boundary dispute resolved by approaching fourth respondent, who gave field measurement book sketch to his land in survey - Held, limitation for the government to file a suit for declaration is 30 years. If the Government files a suit under limitation Act, can they succeed now or whether such suit is barred by limitation - These are the primary issues, which cannot be ignored. Now that the final orders are already passed, it would not be proper for this court to express any opinion on these questions - Court is of considered opinion that the petitioners may file appeal before the RDO against the proceedings of MRO. As and when such appeals are filed, RDO shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders keeping in view the observations made hereinabove on legal questions - Till such exercise is completed, there shall be status quo as to possession - writ petitions is disposed of

( 1 ) AS the writ petitions and contempt case arise in the background of facts, which is similar, they are being disposed of by this common order. The fact of the matter, which is general to all the writ petitions and contempt case, may be noticed in brief.

( 2 ) THE land in survey No. 480 in Dhone village of Dhone Mandal in Kurnool District was purchased by late Mahaboob Khan under registered sale deed dated 15-8-1919. He was enjoying the property along with his three sons Hasan Khan, Abdur Rahaman khan and late Noor Khan. After death of mahaboob Khan, statedly, there was a partition of the properties among the three sons under registered partition deed dated 9-7-1958. Hasan Khan got Acs. 9. 09, Abdur rahman Khan got Acs. 8. 86 and an extent of acs. 8. 00 fell to the share of Noor Khan. State acquired about Acs. 1. 06 belonging to Hasan khan, Acs. 1. 14 belonging to Abdur Rahman khan and Acs. 2. 63 belonging to Noor Khan, (total extent of Acs. 4. 83) for laying a bypass road for N. H. 7 pursuant to a notification dated 21-9-1990 under Section 4 of Land Acquisition act, 1894 (LA Act, for brevity ). All the owners obtained necessary pattadar pass books and title deeds under the A. P. Rights in Land and pattadar Passbooks Act, 1971 (the Act, for brevity ). It appears, in 1978 Abdur Rahman khan transferred the remaining land (after land acquisition) by way of registered gift deed in favour of third petitioner in June 2004. Further, Hasan Khan got the boundary dispute resolved by approaching fourth respondent, who gave field measurement book sketch to his land in survey No. 480. /3c.

( 3 ) SIMILARLY, the land admeasuring acs. 3. 50 and Acs. 0. 65 in survey N0. 479/hic and the land admeasuring Acs. 1. 61 in survey no. 479/hia was allegedly purchased by kamal Saheb and Ramgopal under registered sale deeds from Peda Pullaiah and China pullaiah respectively. In 1977, the government acquired about Ac. 1. 00 of land and paid compensation to these persons and they were in possession of the land. The land admeasuring Acs. 3. 00, A. cs. Q. 74 and acs. 0. 73 in survey No. 479/h3 was purchased by M/s. Pinjari Bashu, G. Hanumantha Rao and N. Lakshumaiah under registered sale deed dated 27-10-1986 and sale agreement dated 14-6-1986. When the land was acquired from out the said survey number, the government paid compensation to the vendors of these persons.

( 4 ) IT appears, Gayatri Juice Industries, dhone, allegedly approached local M. L. A. , for allotment of land for establishing a factory. Therefore, the District Collector and Revenue divisional Officer (RDO), Kurnool brought pressure on the Mandal Revenue Officer (MRO), (fourth respondent) for acquiring the land in survey Nos. 479 and 480 admeasuring acs. 32. 96, which was in possession of large number of persons. The MRO issued notice on 26-2-2005 and 9-6-2005 informing that the land in various sub-divisions of survey nos. 479 and 480 is Government land, that various persons got pattadar passbooks for the said Government land, that they have violated conditions of D-Form patta and, therefore, they were asked to attend the enquiry. The owners/occupants submitted their objections along with the documents claiming absolute ownership. The MRO allegedly did not conduct any enquiry but served an order on 14-8-2005 to the effect that the land is resumed to the Government for provision of house sites to the eligible poor persons to be distributed on 16-8-2005. Aggrieved by the same, Hasan Khan, Abdur rahman Khan and Saleema Begum, who are the joint owners of the property in survey no. 480 filed W. P. No. 18630 of 2005. M/s. Kamal Saheb and Ramgopal, alleged owners of land in survey Nos. 479/hic and 479/hia filed W. P. No. 18990 of 2005 and m/s. Pinjari Bashu, G. Hanumantha Rao and n. Lakshumaiah (alleged owners of land in survey No. 479/h3) filed W. P. No. 19378 of 2005.

( 5 ) IN all these matters, this Court while admitting the writ petitions, passed orders directing the revenue officials to mai






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 Back to top