(Per K.S. Appa Rao, J.)

Review AS.M.P.No.951 of 2011 is 'filed to review the judgment and decree dated 27-10-2006 passed in AS.No.3580 of 2004 and A.S.M.P.No.952 of 2011 is filed to suspend the operation of the said judgment and decree. On 25-08-2011, during the course of hearing, this Court took an objection that the review petition ought not to have been numbered unless there is an application to condone the delay in the filing the application, by duly explaining the reasons for not filing the review petition in time. In compliance thereof, the review petitioners filed AS.M.P.No.2058 of 2011 to condone the delay of 1613 days in filing the review petition in AS.M.P.No.951 of 201lo

2. Since the reliefs sought in these three petitions are connected to each other and• the parties are also common, these petitions are clubbed and disposed of by , this common order.

3. The petitioners in these petitions are the some of the respondents in A.S.No.3580 of 2004, and they are being represented by the General Power of Attorney Sri T.K. Raghavan. The first resp0I).dent in all the three petitions is the appellant in the said appeal. The respondent Nos.2 to 14 herein are proforma respondents and' they are not necessary parties according to the petitioners.

4. Before going into the merits of the case, it is pertinent to refer to the first round of litigation which went up to the Apex Court, as stated by the petitioners/ respondents in their affidavit, as follows:

The petitioners/respondents are the descendants of Great Saint and Devotee Sri Tallapaka Annamacharya. The petitioners/ respondents and the first respondent/ appellant have a dispute over the title of the property in Sy.Nos.645, 686 and 679/2 for an extent of 28-32 cents in Tirumala. Originally the said property belongs to the petitioners/respondents since it was given to them as inam by the emperors of Vijayanagar Dynasty to Sri Tallapaka Annamacharya's family for rendering services to the Lord, and since then they are enjoying the said property. The dispute . arose between the parties~ when one of the family members noticed in the revenue records that the names of the Thallapaka family are changed and the mime of the first respondent/appellant was incorporated during the enquiry in the year 1959-60. Then one of the members of the Tallapaka family i.e., late Sri Tallapaka Venkata Srinivasacharyulu, the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioner Nos.2 to 4 herein, filed an application in the year 1982 before the then Commissioner, Survey, Settlements & Land Records, Hyderabad, stating that without notice to the inamdars, the patta has been granted to the respondent/appellant for the said property in Sy.Nos.645, 686 and 679/2 77 situated in Tirumala. Then the Commissioner gave a direction to the Inam Deputy Tahsildar to issue notices to both the parties and to conduct an enquiry as per the provisions of the AP. (AA) Inams (Abolition & Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956. Accordingly, the Inam Deputy Tahsildar conducted enquiry after issuing notices to all the parties mainly between the petitioners/respondents and respondent/ appellant in the year 1983 and revealed the fact that earlier no notice was given while granting patta in respect of the said land to the respondent/appellant and after hearing both sides and after verification of the records, he carne to the conclusion that the said land is Inam land belonging to Tallapaka family and granted patta in favour of the petitioners/respondents. Against the said order, an appeal was filed by the respondent/appellant in the year 1984 before the Revenue Divisional Officer who also confirmed the order of the Inam Deputy Tahsildar and dismissed the appeal filed by the respondent/appellant. Then the respondent/appellant filed a Revision Petition before the Commissioner, Survey, Settlement & Land Records, Hyderabad in the year 1985-86 and the said Revision Petition was also dismissed by confirming the orders of the lower Revenue Tri