IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Appellant
Vs.
Sattiraju and Ors. – Respondent
A.S. No. 655 of 1995
Decided On : 22.08.2014
Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Section 7 - Civil Procedure Code - Section 80 - An Act to provide measures for checking unauthorized occupation of lands which are property of Government. schedule property - Possession of property - Consequential permanent injunction - Appeal against decree and judgment passed on file of Court of Subordinate Judge - Appellant was defendant respondents were plaintiffs before trial Court and they will after be referred as defendant and plaintiffs for convenience - Appeal against plaintiff dismissed for default vide order for non-prosecution appeal against plaintiff is dismissed as abated by Court order as legal-heirs of plaintiff are not brought on record and appeal against plaintiff and is dismissed for default Court order – Held, One of contentions of the defendant is that civil Court has no jurisdiction when proceedings are initiated Act - No doubt there is a bar of Act to entertain a suit by civil Court which specifically ousted jurisdiction of civil Court and no injunction can be granted by any Court in respect of any proceedings Act - Here plaintiffs exhausted remedies by way of appeal to Collector revision to commissioner of Land Revenue filed Writ Petitions questioning proceedings issued by defendant Act of 1905 and finally in view of direction issued by this Court in Writ Petitions to establish their title to property they filed present suit - Therefore bar of Act of is not a complete bar and that apart authorities Act would not grant relief which a civil Court is competent to grant declaration of title - If statute prescribes effective machinery to grant relief which a civil Court is competent to grant this Court cannot infer ouster of jurisdiction of civil Court - Appeal dismissed (Para 30)
M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.
1. The State filed this appeal against the decree and judgment passed in O.S. No. 18 of 1980 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Ramachandrapuram (for short, 'the trial Court'), dated 18-09-1987. The appellant was the defendant, the respondents were the plaintiffs before the trial Court and they will hereinafter be referred as defendant and plaintiffs for convenience.
2. Initially, plaintiff Nos. 1 to 11 filed suit O.S. No. 51 of 1976 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry, and, later, plaintiff Nos. 12 to 16 are impleaded as per the orders in I.A. No. 1478 of 1977 dated 06-11-1979. Later, it was transferred to the trial Court and renumbered as O.S. No. 18 of 1980. Though the appeal was filed against plaintiff Nos. 1 to 16, the appeal against plaintiff Nos. 3 and 11 to 14 is dismissed for default vide order dated 17-09-1993 for non-prosecution, the appeal against plaintiff Nos. 9 and 15 is dismissed as abated by Court order dated 09-04-2001 as legal-heirs of plaintiff Nos. 9 and 15 are not brought on record and the appeal against plaintiff Nos. 10 and 16 is dismissed for default vide Court order dated 17-12-2007.
3. The plaintiffs filed this suit against the defendant, for declaration of their title to schedule property and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendant and its men from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of schedule property, alleging that schedule property is Lanka land, contiguous to Goutami river, which is a branch of Godavari river, within the limits of Baduguvani Lanka of Alamuru Taluk and Vaddiparru of Kothapet Taluk, East Godavari District. The schedule property is ryotwari patta land belonging to the plaintiffs. The total extent of land was about Ac. 50.00 cents and the land was submerged and washed away by the river on account of floods in Godavari for some years. Subsequently, there was a large reformation of Lanka land due to receding of water and changing its course by the river in the year 1962-63. The plaintiffs, believing that the newly formed Lanka was the reformation of their eroded ryotwary patta land, applied for localization of their patta land and for possession on payment of necessary fee to Government. On the application of the plaintiffs, Tahsildar, Kothapet Taluk, got the land localized by Lanka Deputy Surveyor, the same was approved, after due scrutiny, by District Surveyor, conducted necessary enquiry as to title of the plaintiffs and passed appropriate orders. The plaintiffs were directed to enter into possession as per the orders of Tahsildar in D. Dis. No. 5350/67 dated 31-10-1967. On the similar application of the plaintiffs, Deputy Tahsildar, Alamuru Taluk, got the land localized in Baduguvani Lanka with Lanka Deputy Surveyor, passed an order in D. Dis. No. 4262/69 dated 26-12-1969 and delivered possession of Baduguvani Lanka land through Revenue Inspector, Alamuru Taluk.
Ever since delivery of possession or taking possession as directed by Tahsildar, Kothapet Taluk, and Deputy Tahsildar, Alamuru Taluk, the plaintiffs are continuing in possession and enjoyment of schedule property by paying land revenue to Government.
As the matter stood thus, some of the villagers, due to local disputes, made a complaint to Tahsildar, Kothapet Taluk, in the year 1970, alleging that the plaintiffs are in unauthorized occupation of reformed Government Lanka land. Thereupon, the then Tahsildar, without considering the orders passed by Tahsildar, Kothapet Taluk, and Deputy Tahsildar, Alamuru Taluk, issued notice on 18-02-1970 under Section 7 of Andhra Pradesh Land Encroachment Act, 1905 (for brevity, 'the Act of 1905'), presuming that plaint schedule land is the land belonging to the State. In fact, the plaintiffs are the owners of schedule property and it is ryotwary patta land. Thereby, Government i
Anathula Sudhakar Vs. P. Buchi Reddy (dead) by LRs. and others AIR 2008 SC 2033
Haradas Vs. Secretary of State AIR 1917 PC 86
Kamala Mills Limited Vs. State of Bombay AIR 1965 SC 1942
Nagubai Ammal and others Vs. B. Shama Rao and others AIR 1956 SC 593
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Korieru Suryanarayana and others AIR 1963 AP 94
Secretary of State Vs. Raja of Vizianagaram AIR 1922 PC 105
Sita Ram Bhau Patil Vs. Ramachandra Nago Patil AIR 1977 SC 1712
Union of India (UOI) Vs. Ibrahim Uddin and another (2012) 8 SCC 148
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.