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

2007 Supreme(AP) 305

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : B.PRAKASH RAO, M.VENKATESWARA REDDY
Vonkela Subrahmanyam - Appellant
Versus
Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act - Respondent
Decided On : 03/16/2007
Case No : Writ Petition No.23325 of 1999

Advocates Appeared:For the Petitioners:O. Manohar Reddy Advocate. For the Respondents:R3, G. Sriram, Advocate.

Headnote:

A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 – Section 8 [1] – Land Grabber - Certiorari to call for the records - Petitioner herein who has been declared as Land Grabber files this writ petition seeking writ of certiorari to call for the records in the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act dismissing the appeal and confirming the orders in on the file of the Special Tribunal under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act-cum-District Judge, allowing the application filed by respondent No.3 herein under Section 8 [1] of Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 and to quash the same 3rd respondent who has filed against the petitioner herein is the applicant before the tribunal and he will be referred to as arrayed before the tribunal for the sake of convenience facts of the case which arise are that application filed by the applicant-3rd respondent, it has been claimed that the Tahsildar, Nellore had initially granted the said house in his favour to an extent of Nellore Bit-I village in Nellore Municipal Limits and he was put in possession of the same. Now it is known, Nellore. Since then he was in possession and enjoyment of the same petitioner herein has grabbed the said site about 6 years back and constructed a house application –Held, Even in the Judgment of this Court challenging the orders of the District Revenue Officer in his cancelling pattas granted in favour of the Memorial Co-operative Housing Society Limited, the order of the District Revenue Officer, Nellore was set aside and the Joint Collector, Nellore was directed to conduct de nova enquiry while directing the members of the society to submit their representation it is not open for this Court to reappreciate any evidence and material on record or to go to any different conclusion and more so, the petitioner has utterly failed to make out any perversity or miscarriage of justice or lack of any evidence and material it has been held in the decision of the Supreme Court reported in that this Court cannot interfere with any such findings of fact as no such valid ground is made out appraisal of the entire evidence available on record and especially on the face of the concurrent findings of both the Tribunals court do not find any merits in the contention of the petitioner regard to this point it is relevant to note that the very object and the purpose for which the legislation has been made, is to prohibit the activity of land grabbers in regard to the land belonging to the Government local authority religious or charitable institutions or endowments including a wakf or private persons an application of this nature under the provisions of section 8 of the Act every such an application may be referred for local inspection or verification or both to the Mandal Revenue Officer and on such reference by the special Court Mandal Revenue Officer or the other officer shall make an inspection or verification on the following aspects – Writ petition is dismissed.

Judgment :-

B. Prakash Rao, J.

The petitioner herein who has been declared as Land Grabber files this writ petition seeking writ of certiorari to call for the records in L.G.A.No.1 of 1999 dated 30-9-1999 of the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act Hyderabad dismissing the appeal and confirming the orders in L.G.O.P.No.20 of 1990 dated 6-11-1998 on the file of the Special Tribunal under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act-cum-District Judge, Nellore allowing the application filed by respondent No.3 herein under Section 8 [1] of Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 and to quash the same.

3rd respondent who has filed L.G.O.P.No:20 of 1990 against the petitioner herein is the applicant before the tribunal and he will be referred to as arrayed before the tribunal for the sake of convenience.

The facts of the case which arise are that:

In the application L.G.O.P.No:20 of 1990 filed by the applicant-3rd respondent, it has been claimed that the Tahsildar, Nellore had initially granted the said house patta on 25-1-1969 in his favour to an extent of 33 1/3rd ankanams in plot No.59 in Survey No.2040/3 of Nellore Bit-I village in Nellore Municipal Limits and he was put in possession of the same. Now it is known as Savitri Nagar area, Dargamitta, Nellore. Since then, he was in possession and enjoyment of the same. However, the petitioner herein has grabbed the said site about 6 years back and constructed a house. Hence, the application.

Contesting the claim of the applicant, it is contended by the petitioner herein that he retired as a conductor from A.P.S.R.T.C., Nellore and he obtained the said site, which was vacant, in the year 1974 and he developed the same by spending about Rs.12,000/- by filling up the pits and levelling the said site and constructed a thatched house and since then he has been living in the same. It is further contended that he is not aware of the assignment of the plot in favour of the applicant in the year 1969 and apart from that, the applicant was never in possession of the same. However, the said patta granted in favour of the applicant, was cancelled by the District Collector, Nellore vide proceedings in Dis.No.13977 of 72 dated 15-5-1975 and hence, the applicant has no right and not entitled for the relief as sought for.

It is admitted in the counter that the suit in O.S.No.703 of 1984 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Nellore, filed by the petitioner against the claimant, was dismissed on 22-7-1998 holding that the cancellation of patta in favour of the applicant is not proper and the claimant was continued to be the owner of the same. However, it is stated that the said finding is not final and no claim can be made by the applicant.

On these and other allegations made on either side, the Special Tribual has framed the following issues:

1. Whether the applicant has title to the extent of 33 1/3 ankanams in plot No:59/Sy.No:2040/3 of Nellore Bit-I village?

2. Whether the petitioner herein grabbed the said site?

3. Whether the petitioner herein perfected his title to the site by adverse possession?

4. Whether this tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain this petition?

5. Whether the applicant is entitled to the reliefs sought in the petition?

6. To what relief?

P.ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were marked on behalf of the applicant. On the other hand, R.ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs. B.1 to B.9 were marked on behalf of the petitioner herein. Ex.C.1 was marked through Court.

On appraisal of the entire evidence and material on record, the Special Tribunal found that the applicant has got valid title to the land in question as claimed by her and the petitioner herein has grabbed the same and further he has not perfected title by any adverse possession. That apart, it is also held that the petitioner herein has grossly failed to establish that he is not a land grabber in spite of the heavy burden lying on him. Thereby, the said application filed by the applic

























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