The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitations of summary proceedings under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution in adjudicating disputes regarding possession and title of immovable property, especially when there are disputed questions of fact. The judgment also emphasizes the need for evidence and the availability of alternate remedies in certain cases.

COMMON ORDER

W.P .No. 3351 of 2019 is filed seeking the following relief:

'... to issue Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in dispossessing the Petitioner from the lands in an extent 1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent 0.40 cents in Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent 0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 situated at Papepalli Village of V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District without following due process of law as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequentially restrain the Respondents herein from dispossessing the petitioner from the ands in an extent 1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent 0.40 cents in Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent 0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 situated at Papepalli Village, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District except in accordance with law and to pass such other or further orders ...'

2. W.P .No. 8024 of 2019 is filed seeking the following relief:

'... to issue WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the Respondent 1 to 5 herein in not taking action against Respondent Nos.6 to 43 in pursuance of the status quo order dated 01.04.2019 passed in W.P .No. 3351 of 2019 by this Hon'ble Court as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequentially restrain the Respondent Nos.6 to 43 herein from proceeding with the illegal constructions on the lands in an extent Ac.1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent Ac.0.40 cents Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent Ac.0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 of the Petitioner situated at Papepalli village, V.Kota Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass such other or further orders ...'

3. W.P .No. 8058 of 2019 is filed seeking the following relief:

'... to issue Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.6 herein in not taking action on the Petitioner's Representations dated 10.03.2019 and 28.03.2019 in accordance with the A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 against Respondents Nos.7 to 43 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequentially restrain the Respondents Nos.7 to 44 herein from proceeding with the illegal constructions on the lands in an extent Ac.1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent Ac.0.40 cents in Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent Ac.0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 of the Petitioner situated at Papepalli Village, V. Kota Mandal, Chittoor District and to pass such other or further orders ...'

4. W.P .No. 16468 of 2021 is filed seeking the following relief:

'..to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing the house site pattas to the third parties basing on the sketch in the lands in an extent of Ac.0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 situated at Papepalli Village of V. Kota Mandal belong to the Petitioner contrary to the order dated 01.04.2019 in I.A .No. 1 of 2019 in W.P .No. 3351 of 2019 without considering the representations dated 08.01.2020, 10.06.2021, 02.07.2021 and 08.07.2021 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of Natural Justice and consequently restrain the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands in an extent of Ac.0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 situated at Papepalli Village of V. Kota Mandal belong to the petitioner by setting aside sketch for Field No.26/3, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 27/1 of Papepalli, V. Kota Mandal and the House site pattas granted in favour of third parties in lands in an extent of Ac.0.82 cents in Sy .No. 26/6, in an extent of Ac.0.40 cents in Sy .No. 26/8 and in an extent of Ac.1.00 cents in Sy .No. 26/9 situated at Papepalli Village of V. Kota Mandal which belongs to the petitioner except in accordance with law and pass such other or further orders J'

5. Since the subject matter and property in these writ petitions are one and the same, these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order.

6. The brief facts of the case are that petitioner's mother-inlaw purcha