SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 199

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J.
B.Sujatha - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana - Respondent
Writ Petition No.10643 Of 2019 
Decided On : 28-05-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SANNAPANENI LOHIT
For the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE TG

Succession rights under the Tenancy Act must be adjudicated by a Civil Court when disputes arise, and revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to grant such rights without timely applications.

Headnote:(A) Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 - Sections 32, 38, and 40 - The court addressed the validity of succession rights under the Tenancy Act and the jurisdiction of revenue authorities in granting such rights. It was determined that the Tahsildar lacks the authority to grant succession under Section 40 without a timely application. (Paras 17-23)

(B) Jurisdiction - The court clarified that succession rights must be adjudicated by a Civil Court when disputes arise over legal heirship, as per precedents. (Paras 20-21)

Facts of the case:
The case involved disputes over succession rights to agricultural land following the death of protected tenants, with conflicting claims between subsequent purchasers and the legal heirs of the original tenants.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the impugned orders were erroneous and set them aside, restoring the appeals for fresh consideration.

Issues: Whether the Mandal Revenue Officer has the competence to grant succession of protected tenancy rights and the implications of time limits for such claims.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that succession claims must be made within a reasonable time and that disputes regarding legal heirship require adjudication in a Civil Court.

Result: Writ petition allowed; orders set aside and appeals restored for fresh disposal.

Table of Content
1. challenge to orders under the tenancy act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. procedural lapses in revenue records. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
3. arguments regarding appeal maintainability. (Para 11 , 12 , 14)
4. title disputes between parties. (Para 15 , 16)
5. court's analysis on jurisdiction and authority. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
6. final ruling and directions for fresh proceedings. (Para 22 , 23)

JUDGMENT :

(B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J.)

Common Order dated 28.03.2008 in Case Nos.F2/3787/2005 and F2/3788/2005 passed by respondent No.3 - the Joint Collector-II, Ranga Reddy District, and consequential order dated 11.02.2019 in Proceedings No.B/637/2018 passed by respondent No.4 - the Tahsildar, Shankarpally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, are challenged in this writ petition contending that those orders are contrary to the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1950 (for short ‘Tenancy Act’) and the Rules made thereunder.

2. Respondent No.5 - Mrs. M. Sridevi (since died, represented by her legal heir - respondent No.6 viz., Mr. Reddy Gokul Kumar) was the appellant in the appeals in Case Nos.F2/3787/2005 and F2/3788/2005 filed under Section 90 of the Tenancy Act challenging the orders passed by respondent No.4 in Case No.A/1139/97 dated 04.11.1997 and Case No.A/1138/1997 dated 25.08.2004. Respondent Nos.2 to 11 in the said appeals are legal heirs of the protected tenants Mr. Maheswaram Lingaiah alias Potti Linga and Mr. Talari Lakshmaiah.

3.1. It was claimed by respondent No.5 in the aforesaid appeals before respondent No.3 that one Mr. Jagannath Reddy was absolute owner, pattedar and exclusive possessor of the land admeasuring Acs.11-15 guntas in Survey No.692 situated at Janwada Village, Shankarpally Mandal, Chevella Taluka, Ranga Reddy District, and his name was recorded for the same as pattedar and possessor. The subject land was cultivated by one Potti Linga and Talari Lakshmaiah before 1950 and their names were recorded as protected tenants in the Final Record of the Protected Tenancy Register. In 1951, the said protected tenants Mr. Potti Linga and Talari Lakshmaiah, orally, surrendered their rights as protected tenants in respect of the subject land by putting the original pattedar Mr. Jagannath Reddy in possession of the same. Pahanies right from 1951-52, 1952-53, 1953-54 clearly indicate that Mr. Jagannath Reddy is pattedar and possessor of the subject land. In 1981, Mr. Jagannath Reddy sold the subject land to one Mr. Bojana Mallaiah under an unregistered sale deed and delivered possession of the same to him.

3.2. Khasra Pahani of 1954-55 clearly shows that Mr. Jagannath Reddy was pattedar and Mr. Bojana Mallaiah was cultivator and Khangi Khareeddar (purchased under an unregistered sale deed). From the date of purchase till 1981, the subject land was in possession and cultivation of Mr. Bojana Mallaiah and his name was also recorded as pattedar and possessor in the revenue records. Subsequently, ownership of the subject land was changed which is as under:

Sl.
No.
YearName of the SellerExtentName of the purchaserRegd. Document
No. Dated
1.1981Bojana MallaiahAc.5-30 gts.Md. Yahyha Siddiqui

2025 of 1981

Dated: 25.04.1091 (sic. 1981)

2.1996Md. Yahyha Siddiqui
and 2 others



--Md. Saluddin

7540 of 1996

Dated: 04.09.1996

3.1998Md. Saluddin--Kowsar Azam

W/o. Md. Azam Moinuddin 10076 of 1998

Dated: 18.12.1998

4.1999Kowsar Azam W/o. Md. Azam Moinuddin--Syed Sayeed Bin Aslam and another

5841 of 1999

Dated: 31.08.1999

5.2001Syed Sayeed Bin Aslam and another--Appellants

3075 of 2001

Dated: 26.04.2001

Thus, respondent No.5 purchased the subject land from one Mr. Syed Sayeed Bin Aslam and Mr. Badar Bin Azzan through registered sale deed dated 26.04.2001 for a valuable consideration.

3.3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, passed ex parte order in Proceedings No.L/2325/2004 dated 28.12.2004, under Section 38(6) of the Tenancy Act in respect of the subject land in Survey No.692 of Janwada Village, Shankerpally

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top