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

2018 Supreme(AP) 868

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATES OF TELANGANA AND ANDHRA PRADESH
M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J.
Narendra M. Agarwal and Ors - Appellant
Versus
Govt. of A.P., Revenue Dept. Hyderabad and Ors - Respondent
W.P. No. 14046 of 2007
Decided On : 10-10-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : P.B. Vijay Kumar

Headnote:

A.P. Land Encroachment Act, 1905 - Section 6 and 7 - Summary remedy - Resort to, by State - Scope - Undisputed Facts reflect that subject land in long settled possession of petitioners and their predecessors in interest - And their claim of title, right and interest based on registered documents, which are decades old - State cannot resort to summary remedy provided by Section 7 - Proceedings under Act cannot be resorted to 'Unless there is an attempted encroachment of a very recent origin - Further, claim of state solely based on entry in Town Survey Land Record(TSLR),which is not enough to deny title of owner - Summary remedy available under said Act is not legal process, which is suited for adjudication of complicated question of title - Proper course is to have matter adjudicated by ordinary Courts of law -Petition allowed ( Para 10 , 11 and 14)

Facts of the case:

Question, that arises for consideration in this appeal, is that Undisputed Facts reflect subject land in long settled possession of petitioners and their predecessors in interest - And their claim of title, right and interest based on registered documents, which are decades old -

Findings of the court:

State cannot resort to summary remedy provided by Section 7 - Proceedings under Act cannot be resorted to 'Unless there is an attempted encroachment of a very recent origin - Further, claim of state solely based on entry in Town Survey Land Record(TSLR),which is not enough to deny title of owner - Summary remedy available under said Act is not legal process, which is suited for adjudication of complicated question of title - Proper course is to have matter adjudicated by ordinary Courts of law.

Result : Petition allowed

ORDER :

M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J.

1. This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners seeking verbatim the following relief:

"For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is hereby prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the proceedings of Spl. Dy. Collector, Land Acquisition in proceedings No. AA/771/2006 dt. 21-5-2007 under Sec. 9(3) and 10 of L.A. Act, in not including the lands of the petitioners with regard to D. No. 3-6-369 and the proceedings of the 7th respondent in Lr. No. 3/ACP/C3/TPS/RW/2007 dt. 8-5-2007 treating the petitioners' land as Govt. land to deny compensation under the Land Acquisition Act and the proceedings of the 5th respondent in Case No. B/3234/2005 dt. 29-7-2006 confirming the order No. D/991/2006 dt. 24-6-2006 of the 6th respondent under the provisions of A.P.L.E. Act as illegal, unwarranted, unjustifiable in the eye of law, initiated with a mala fide intention and violative of Art, 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently by nullifying the said impugned orders direct the respondents either not to interfere with their possession and enjoyment over the land bearing No. 3-6-369/B/3 and other properties, Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad or pay necessary and proper compensation according to the Market rate under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. I have heard the submissions of Sri D.V. Seetharam Murthy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Dr. P.B. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; and of the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition (Telangana), appearing for the respondents 1 to 6. I have perused the material record.

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is this:

'Syed Suleman Ali, son of Syed Rahamat Ali, on behalf of his minor son Syed Masood Ali, who is the pattedar, executed a registered Sale Deed in favour of Mir Siadat Ali Khan, S/o. Mir Qutbuddin Ali vide Document No. 967 of 1342 Fasli for an extent of 1716 square yards, situated at Gagan Mahal, known as Budwellguda, inside the municipal limits of Circle-A, presently situated in Himayat Nagar Mandal inside the municipal limits of Circle-3 of Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. The said Mir Siadat Ali Khan later executed an oral Gift to his wife Qadarunisa Begum, on or after 4th August, 1934, as per their custom. Thereafter, Syed Masood Ali also sold the property to an extent of 323.16 square yards to Qadarunisa Begum by way of registered Sale Deed vide Document No. 1601 of 1354 Fasli. And, as such, the said Qadarunisa Begum became the absolute owner of the entire property to an extent of 2040 square yards. Ever since, she has been paying property tax to the above property till the execution of the registered Sale Deed in favour of the writ petitioners in the year 1967.

(a) The premises bearing D. No. 3-6-369/B/3/1, comprising of 8 shops, has been let out to the tenants as per the following position:

i.

Premier Auto Electrical Ltd.

1973 to 1980

ii.

Vacate

1981 to 1985

iii.

Exide Battery

1986 to 2002

iv.

Balaji Kids

1986 to 2001

v.

Dadus Mithai continuing

1993 to till date

vi.

Fabirkare continuing

2004 to till date

vii.

S.S Communication continuing

2004 to till date

viii.

T.N.G. continuing

2006 to till date

(b) The premises bearing D. No. 3-6-369/B/3/2, has been let out to the tenants as per the following position:

i.

Andhra Bank

1973 to 1994

ii.

Vacate

1995 to 2006

iii.

Aristotle Educational Society SLR College

2007 to till date continuing

(c) The premises bearing D. No. 3-6-369/B/3/3, has been let out to the tenants as per the following p

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