Back
ALOK ARADHE, T. VINOD KUMAR
Visweswara Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Telangana State Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts surrounding the land ownership and disputes (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. court observations regarding the proceedings (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. arguments from respondents against appellant's claim (Para 19 , 20) |
| 4. legal standards for adjudicating title issues in writ petitions (Para 34 , 41) |
| 5. final ruling and court directions on land possession (Para 59 , 60) |
JUDGMENT :
This intra-court appeal is filed against common order dated 28.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge by which three writ petitions have been dismissed. However, challenge in this appeal is confined to order of the learned Single Judge insofar it pertains to writ petition No.30855 of 2016 filed by the appellants, which has also been dismissed. In order to appreciate the appellants’ challenge to the impugned order, relevant facts need mention which are stated infra:
(i) FACTS:-
2. Eleven pattedars held the land measuring 525.39 acres situated at Raidurg Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agricultural Ceiling Act’) came into force on 01.01.1975, whi
The court held that disputed questions of title and possession cannot be resolved in a writ petition, and the petitioners were entitled to remain in possession of the land despite ULC proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of proving possession for the purposes of the Repeal Act and the statutory bar on transfer created by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Re....
An order declaring land surplus issued in the name of a deceased person is a nullity and violates principles of natural justice, warranting its quashing.
Delay in asserting rights under land ceiling regulation impacts maintainability of writ petitions; the court dismisses claims due to laches but permits civil recourse.
Timely objection is essential in ceiling proceedings; long delay in seeking judicial intervention leads to barring of relief due to laches, irrespective of alleged possession.
Possession of property cannot be disturbed without due process; rights must be protected under constitutional provisions, and authorities are bound by statutory timelines and requirements.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
