ORDER :

CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA, J.

Challenging the validity and the legality of the award dated 27.11.2018 passed by the City Civil Court Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad, vide LAC.No.1318 of 2018 in E.P.No.2 of 2018 in O.S.No.108 of 2016 of the Court of XXIV Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. The petitioner seeking to set aside the said award, has also prayed to declare the registered sale deed vide document No.300 of 2019 dated 24.01.2019, which is based on the said award of the Lok Adalat, as null and void.

2. Heard and gave due consideration to the submission of the learned counsel for the parties.

3. The impugned award which is passed in an Execution Petition vide E.P.No.2 of 2018 in O.S.No.108 of 2016 is based on the memorandum of compromise that was forwarded by the Decree-Holder, who is respondent No.2 herein, and Judgment-Debtor Nos.5 and 6 who are respondent Nos.7 and 8 herein. The petitioner challenged the validity of the said award on the ground that it was obtained through fraud and collusion.

4. The version of the petitioner, as could be drawn from the affidavit filed by him in support of the writ petition, is that his parents, Late Ramachandraiah and Late Vishalakshmi, were the owners of the house property bearing House No.4-3-616, 616/A, 617 and 620 having ground + two floors located at Ramkote, Near Sarojini Devi Hall, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred as “the suit schedule property”), having purchased the same through a registered sale deed in the year 1968. His parents were having six children-K.Shobha Rani, P.Vasantha, P.Naresh Kumar i.e., the petitioner herein, S.Premalatha, Late P.Srinivas and T.Bruneshwari. As his younger brother-P.Srinivas was causing trouble in the family, his father executed a Will on 07.6.1993 and likewise, his mother also executed a Will on 24.6.2014 in respect of the suit schedule property which was purchased in their names. His younger brother filed a suit for partition, during the lifetime of his father, against his father and other family members vide O.S.No.1107 of 2000 on the file of the Court of VII Junior Civil Judge and obtained a preliminary decree regarding the properties pertaining to their grandfather and that, respondent Nos.7 and 8 herein being the wife and the daughter of his deceased brother are pursuing the final decree proceedings.

While so, his father passed away on 20.10.2013, his mother died on 28.12.2016 and his younger brother also passed away on 15.6.2017 due to ill-health. The suit in O.S.No.108 of 2016 was dismissed against his parents, but it was decreed against his deceased brother though his brother was no more as on the date of decree. The dismissal of the suit against his parents was not questioned by respondent No.2 herein. The Court granted alternative relief of refund of an amount of Rupees Sixty lakhs against his deceased brother. Thus, the property of his parents is no way concerned to respondent No.2 herein. It is also contended that the petitioner is in occupation of his entire half share of the suit schedule property as per the Will executed by his father and that, his deceased younger brother was in occupation of the rest of the share, but to his shock and surprise, a legal notice was received by his tenants wherein it was mentioned that the noticees became the owners of the entire property through the award of the Lok Adalat dated 27.11.2018 in E.P.No.2 of 2018 in O.S.No.108 of 2016. It is stated that the suit as well as the Execution Petition (EP) are collusive and the Secretary of the City Civil Court Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad, who is respondent No.1 herein, fell into the trap of respondent No.2, who played fraud and mischief and suppressed the facts, and passed the award. The petitioner contended that the said judgment and decree are not binding upon him and that, it is a settled proposition of law that fraudulent orders will not survive and they can be questioned at