J. SREENIVAS RAO
A. Srinivas, S/o. Kumara Swamy – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
The Brief facts of the case are as follows:
2.1 Petitioners submits that they have purchased the land to an extent of Acs.1-27 guntas in Sy.No.712/A of Molangur Village, Shankarapatnam Mandal, Karimnagar District, through registered sale deed dated 29.07.2013, (herein after called as “subject property”) from Korem Mukunda Reddy by paying valid sale consideration. Originally, the said land belongs to Korem Papaiah, who is none other than the father of the petitioners’ vendor. Subsequently, the Petitioners submitted application before respondent No.4 for mutation of their names in the revenue records. At that stage, respondent No.4 informed them that respondent No.5 filed app
Ashok Kumar v. New India Assurance Co Ltd
Udit Narain Singh Malpaharia Vs. Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, AIR 1963 SC 786
DharampalSatyapal Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise and Ors, (2015) 8 SCC 519
Gundalapurapu Eswaramma V. The state of Telangana and others
The court reaffirmed that judicial authorities must adhere to principles of natural justice, ensuring all parties are heard before any adverse decisions are made.
The scope of judicial review is confined to decision making process and not the decision per se.
The main legal point established is the requirement of notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before passing orders under Sec.5(3) of the A.P. Record of Rights in Land and Pattedar Passb....
Revenue authorities may not adjudicate on civil title disputes under A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act; parties should approach civil court for resolution.
The main legal point established is that the absence of permission and validation under the A.P. (T.A.) Tenancy and Agriculture Land Act 1950 renders a sale transaction void and unlawful.
The court emphasized the necessity of recording reasons in judicial decisions, asserting that non-compliance violates principles of natural justice.
The revisional jurisdiction under Section 9 of the ROR Act cannot be exercised after a long delay, and the settled rights of a person under the ROR Act cannot be unsettled after a lapse of more than ....
The court ruled that orders affecting rights must not be made without providing notice and opportunity to the affected party, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.