Ownership disputes regarding lands belonging to religious institutions must be resolved through the Endowments Tribunal, making writ petitions under Article 226 inappropriate.

K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:

“……to issue a Writ or order direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in including the land in Sy No 550 in an extent of Ac 0 06 cents of Tadipatri Village, Ananatpur district, in the list properties belonging to the Hindu Religious Institutions Endowments furnished to the 4th respondent in his proceedings Lr in Rc No NN1/34576/07 dated 29.12.2008, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the civil court decrees and consequently set aside the same and direct the 4th respondent to register the document in respect of land in Sy No 550 in an extent of Ac 0 06 cents of Tadipatri Village,Ananatpur district, as and when the same is presented and pass……”

2. Brief facts of the case are that the 1^st petitioner had purchased an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in Sy. No 550 of Tadipatri village, with specific boundaries, from the 2^ndpetitioner and his two brothers by names Chinna venkataramana and Venkata sivudu, under a registered sale deed dated No.3405/1995 dated 16.12.1995. Now the 2nd petitioner along with another person want to purchase back the same. When the petitioners went to the 4th respondent's office for ascertaining the present market value and the stamp duty to be paid for registering the same he informed the petitioners that he cannot process the document for registration in respect of above mentioned property as the same is included by the 2nd respondent in the list furnished by him under Sec.22-A (1)(c) of the REGISTRATION ACT , the under the impugned proceedings.

Originally a vacant site measuring Ac.0.06 cents situated in 2nd ward, Tadipatri Municipal Area belonged to one Kuntumalla Lakshmi narashaih who sold the same in favour of Obannapeta Chenna venkataiah, under a registered sale deed No. 1326/1946 dated 31-5-1946. The said Chenna Venktaiah in turn sold the said site to Smt. Patti Venkata Subbamma, w/o P Venkata Swamy under a regd. sale deed No. 2133/1951 dated 22-8-1951. Meanwhile Avadhut Thimma Ramayya Mutt, represented by its disciples Chenna Rangappa and 37others filed O.S. No. 54 of 1962 for declaration of the title and for recovery of possession of the said vacant land claiming that same along with some other vacant sites belong to Avadhut Thimma Ramayya Mutta. Smt. Patti Venkata Subbamma, through whom petitioners’ vendor purchased, is the 9th defendant in the suit. The suit was dismissed by the District Munisif, Anantapur by judgment and decree dated 29-1-1964. Aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff filed A.S. NO. 63 of 1965 before the Additional District Judge, Anantapur and the same was dismissed by judgment dated 2-3-1966. No further appeal was filed by the said plaintiff and the decree became final. Subsequently in the year 1974 the said Mutt was taken over by the Government along with its properties. It is stated that the Government being successor in interest is bound by the decrees suffered by the Mutt.

While the matter stood thus, the 2nd petitioner along with his two brothers by names Dharmavaram Chinna Venkataraman and Dharmavarm Venkata Sivudu purchased the said site from Smt. Patti Venkta Subbamma under a registered document No. 1938/1995 dated 1-7-1995. The 1^st petitioner purchased the same property from 2^nd petitioner and his brothers under a registered document No.3405/1995 dated 16-12-1995. Since then the 1^st petitioner is in possession of the said property. Now the 1^st petitioner wants to sell the said site and the 2^nd petitioner is willing to purchase t