SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI, J, J.

( 1 ) THESE second appeals are referred to a Division Bench by our learned brother, Upendralal Waghray, J. on the questions whether the civil court can go into the correctness of determination of the nature of the land under Section 11 of the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 (for short the Act ) by the Assistant settlement Officer and whether any finality is attached to such a decision of the Assistant Settlement Officer, so they are posted before us.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to these questions may briefly be narrated here. S. A. No. 458/84 is filed by the plaintiff in O. S. No. 1212/79 on the file of the District Munsif, Nellore, who filed the suit for permanent injunction claiming to be the owner of the land bearing S No. 422/4 of Manobolu village. On August 23, 1962 the Tahsildaf, Nellore granted patta (Ex. A-1) of the land in question to the plaintiff on the ground of the land being Government Poramboke. While the suit was pending, the Settlement officer granted patta to the defendants under Section 11 (a) of the Act. Against the order of the Settlement Officer granting patta, the plaintiff filed revision which was dismissed by the Director of Settlements on November, 18,1980 (Ex. B-30 ). The trial court after framing necessary issues and on appraisal of the evidence on record recorded a finding that the patta ex. B. 16 was not valid as the land was not ryoti land but Government poram- boke. On appeal, in A. S. No. 46/82, the learned District Judge, Nellore held that Ex. B. 16 cannot be questioned in a civil court. Consequently, he allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. Thus, the second appeal came to be filed.

( 3 ) IN S. A. No. 484/84 also the plaintiff in O. S. No. 37 of 1977 on the file of District Munsif s Court, Gajapathinagaram, is the appellant. He laid the suit for declaration of title to the suit land bearing S. Nos. 1/5, 2/8, 2/12 measuring Ac. 7-17 cents known as Yerra Gudde Mattu and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit land. Sri Rangarajapuram village was an estate within the meaning of the Act which was taken by the Government on January 7, 1959. The Settlement authorities classified the suit lands as Banjar lands. The plaintiff claimed that his predecessors were tenants of the inam lands and the land being ryoti land, he was entitled to patta. He alleged that, on 7-6-1977, the defendants attempted to evict him from the suit land which necessitated him to file the present suit. The defence of the defendants was that the lands were Banjar lands which vest in the Government. The defendants also denied that the plaintiff was tenant of the suit land and had any occupancy right. Their case was that subsequent to the settlement, the plaintiff had encroached upon the suit land, that on may 4, 1977 the suit lands were assigned to the defendants and possession was also delivered to them. It was also stated that the plaintiff did not approach the Settlement Officer for grant of patta under Section 11 (a) of the Act. The trial court after framing necessary issues including the issue "whether this court is not having jurisdiction in view of the provisions under the Estates Abolition Act" - has held that the plaintiff failed to establish his possession as aueged and that the question whether the land is a ryoti land or not, has to be determined by the Settlement Officer and the civil Court has no jurisdiction to decide the same and in this view of the matter dismissed the suit of the plaintiff. On Appeal in A. S. No. 139/81, the learned Additional District Judge, Vizianagaram confirmed the judgement and decree of the trial court, hence the second appeal.

( 4 ) SRI S. Ananda Reddy, the learned counsel for the appellants in s. A. No. 458/84 and Sri M. Krishna Mohana Rao, the learned counsel for the appellants in S A. No. 484/84, submit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document