( 1 ) THIS revision is filed against the order passed on a memo in O. S. No. 1160 of 1983 on the file of the IInd Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

( 2 ) THE respondents in the revision are the purchasers of the site in question from defendants 3,44 and 5. They purchased the said land under a registered sale deed dated 5-6-1981. They applied for permission to construct house to hud A, under Section 26 of the Urban Land Ceiling Act. The permission was not granted. The Government claimed that this is a Government Land. Therefore, the respondents have filed O. S. No. 1160 of 1983 for declaration of their title and possession or in the alternative for payment of compensation. While the matter was pending on the file of the IInd Additional Judge, City civil Court, Hyderabad, Government filed a memo stating that this matter pertains to land grabbing. The tribunal for land grabbing is constituted and that Court has exclusive jurisdiction over land grabbing cases and the same cannot be tried by the City Civil Court. This memo was argued at length and the learned IInd Additional Judge rejected the memo.

( 3 ) AGGRIEVED by the said order the present revision is filed by the government.

( 4 ) SECTION 7-A (l) of Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 as amended by Act 6 of 1988 reads as follows:"every Special Tribunal shall have power to try all cases not taken cognizance of by the Special Court relating to any alleged act of land grabbing, or with respect to the ownership and title to, or lawful possession of the land grabbed whether before or after the commencement of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) amendment Act, 1987 and brought before it and pass such orders (including orders by way of interim directions) as it deems fit. "

( 5 ) FURTHER the case on hand is covered by the judgment of this Court in government of A. P. vs. Sathaiah. In that case also suit was filed for recovery of possession of certain land situated within Urban Agglomeration claiming its purchase under a registered sale deed - Defendants claiming the land as belonging to Government originally and now as belonging to HUDA. Subsequently issue of land grabbing arose out of the pleadings. In these circumstances it was held:". . . . . . SAID question is exclusively triable by Special Court under the Act - Civil Court s jurisdiction in respect of that suit is barred. "

( 6 ) IT was also observed that the suit shall stand transferred to Special tribunal under Section 8 (8 ). It was also held that the Land Grabbing prohibition Act, though a State Act, over rides the provisions of C. P. C. The special Tribunal or Special Court alone has got jurisdiction.

( 7 ) IN view of the above judgment the memo filed by the Government is proper. The order under revision is set aside.

( 8 ) THE revision is allowed and in the circumstances without costs.