Common Judgment: (Per Dar, J)

1. These two appeals, A.S.No.4116 of 2004 and A.S.No.4119 of 2004, arise out of a common decree and judgment in O.S.143 of 2002 and O.S.24 of 2003 (old O.S.869 of 1998), respectively, on the file of learned II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District.

2. O.S.143 of 2002 was filed by the appellants for declaration that they have perfected their title by adverse possession over Ac.7-03 gts situated in Sy.No.289 in Puppalaguda village and for a permanent injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the said property. Equally, respondent Rithu Malhotra filed O.S.No.24 of 2003 for a permanent injunction restraining the appellants from interfering with the above said property.

3. The case of the appellants, in brief is, that they and their ancestors have been in possession of the suit property right from 1936. Originally it belonged to one Fakaryar Jung. Their father Gandaiah took the land on lease from Fakaryar Jung. During partition, Fakaryar Jung migrated to Pakistan in 1947. Since then no one has claimed ownership or possession. In the year 1988, the revenue authorities issued notice dated 3-12-1988 under Encroachment Removal Act. They engaged an advocate and approached the authority on 27-12-1988 and sought time for filing counter. The advocate has informed that he would inform the date of hearing. Nothing was heard thereafter. While so, in the year 1992 the officials of the state government with the assistance of the police tried to dispossess them from the schedule property then they filed W.P.No.2692 of 1992 for issuance of Mandamus to protect their interest and possession and an interim direction was obtained not to disturb their possession. On 2-11-1994, writ petition was disposed directing the revenue authorities to consider their representations. In the above proceedings from the counters they could know that the suit land was declared to be evacuee property under the provisions of Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 (for short ‘Act 1950’) and that the suit land was allotted to one Motilal, a migrant from Pakistan, under the Displaced Persons Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1957 (for short the ‘Act 1957’) and that the G.P.A holder of Motilal sold the land to the respondent-Ritu Malhotra. She alleged that Motilal inducted her into possession. On that they approached the government requesting for allotment of those lands to them. The Mandal Revenue Officer on the report of the Mandal Revenue Surveyor, after full-fledged enquiry, sent his report dated 29-5-1993 admitting their possession for more than thirty years. When the revenue authorities tried to dispossess them, they approached the High Court by way of W.P.No.7288 of 1996 and the High Court directed the government to maintain status quo. When there was violation of the orders, they filed contempt case C.C.477/2000. The District Collector gave undertaking to remove the fencing. After dismissal of their writ petition, Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court and the same was listed for admission. Neither Motilal nor the vendee Ritu Malhotra was ever in possession. In view of the false claims made by the respondent, they were forced to file this suit. The custodian has never exercised any right in the property. Therefore they filed the suit for declaration of their title and perpetual injunction.

4. The defendant Ritu Malhotra filed written statement resisting the suit. She stated that the custodian of evacuee property declared the suit land as evacuee land and allotted the same to one Motilal Chandumal in the year 1955 and issued sale certificate to the said allottee in 1956. The custodian directed the Collector to deliver the possession to the said allottee as per the sale certificate. The revenue authorities accordingly delivered the possession to the allottee. The Settlement Officer, Bombay informed Gandaiah, the father of the appellants on 21-7-1970 that the land was already