( 1 ) THESE two appeals are directed against the common judgment of the learned single Judge upholding the remand made by the Collector of Medak at sangareddy for enquiry to the second respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer, medak relating to the validity of the claims of the respondents, while rejecting the claim of the appellants of both the appeals to the disputed lands. The facts relating to the cases are rather complex having undergone series of litigations including coming to this Court twice or thrice, for which it is necessary, for clear appreciation, to adumbrate those. Admittedly, the appellants in W. A. No. 847/93 and the respondents in that appeal, who are the respondents 3 to 7 in W,a,no. l028/93, are claiming the land through one Surabhi Narasa Goud. The appellants in W. A. No. 1028/93 is claiming the lands through the original inamdar of the land. For the sake of convenience, the appellant in W. A. No. 847/93 are referred in this judgment as appellants and the respondents 4 to 8 in that appeal are referred as respondents. The appellant in W. A. No. 1028/93 is referred as the Inamdars.

( 2 ) THE admitted facts are that Surabhi Narasa Goud got a declaration in his favou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document