Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(AP) 9222
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRSENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1284 OF 2011 Between:
1. YENDRAPRAGADU SAMBASIVA RAO & ANOTHER S/o. Sitaramaiah, Employee R/o. Tanuku, West Godavari District.
2. Yendrapragada Venkata Ratnam, W/o. Sitaramaiah, Housewife, R/o. Pedakakani Village and Mandal, Guntur District.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND:
1. ALAPATI RAMA SWAMY Died per LR R5 S o. Rattaiah Business, R o. Pedakakani (V M), Guntur District.
3. Sri Vysya Satram, Pedakakani (V& M), Rep. by its Single Trutee & Asst.
Commissioner-Cum-E.O.
of Sri Bhramaramba Malleswara Swamy Devasthanam, Pedakakani (V & M), Guntur District.
4. Asst. Commissioner, Endowments, Guntur.
5. Bonthu Siva Reddy S/o. Nagi Reddy Chairman Sri Malleswara Swamy Temple Peddakakani Guntur District.
R4 is impleaded as per the Court order dated 18/07/2022 in I.A.No.1/2022.
6. ALAPATI PRASAD S O LATE ALAPATI RAMASWAMY Age 45 yrs, R/O Aaditri's valiveti Residency, 5th Floor, Opposite Sub-Registrar office, Peddakakani (V M) , Guntur District-522509.
Respondent-5 is brought on record as LR of deceased R1 amended as per orders in IA 2/2022 in CMA 1284/2011 dated 4/11/2022.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner(s): RAMA CHANDRA RAO GURRAM Counsel for the Respondents: .
The Court made the following: ORDER HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CIVIL MISCELALNEOUS APPEAL Nos. 1283 & 1284 of 2011
COMMON JUDGMENT:
Since the issue involved, the parties and the schedule property in both the civil miscellaneous appeals are one and same, they are being disposed of by this Common Judgment.
C.M.A.No.1283 of 2011
2. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred, challenging the Judgment (Award) dated 24.10.2011 passed in OA 1344 of 2010. The said OA has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department and the Trustee of ‘Sri Vysya Choultry’ under Section 83 of Endowments Act seeking eviction of the Appellants from the schedule property which was allowed directing the Respondents herein to vacate and hand over the premises (schedule appended to the decree of the award) within one month.
C.M.A.No.1284 of 2011
3. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred, challenging the Judgment (Award) dated 24.10.2011 passed in OA No.1329 of 2010, by the appellants, who are Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in the OA. This OA was filed by one Alapati Ramaswamy, under Section 87(1)(c) of the Act. The petition was allowed in part holding that the Petitioner got locus standi to file the OA claim and the petition schedule property is the endowed property of the ‘public choultry’ known as ‘Sri Vysya Dharma Satram, Peddakakani’ as a public charitable endowment/charitable institution. It is further held that Respondent Nos.3 and 4 (appellants herein) did not acquire any right or title over the schedule property by adverse possession and the decree and judgment dated 11.03.2002 in OS No.459 of 1990 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge Court, Guntur, on the suit filed by Respondent No.4 (in OA No.1329 of 2010) against the legal heirs of the Vendees of the original of Ex.P1 i.e., the sale deed of the year 1942, is no way binding to the Endowments Department or the Petitioner or other public much less to bar the Petitioner’s claim either as res judicata or obiter.
Counter averments in brief:
4. Respondent No.2/Sri Vysya Satram filed counter affidavit in both the appeals contending that the subject property was purchased by Sri Amara Venkateswarlu and Muvvala Venkata Subba Rao under a registered sale deed dated 07.03.1942 for the purpose of construction of the said Choultry and after construction of the building, they dug a well. ‘Sri Vysya Satram’ was managed by them till their death by providing rooms to the pilgrims.
(ii) It is averred that the Choultry was notified as a public charitable institution by the Endowments Department under Serial No.246 vide R.C.No.15388/1967-47, dated 01.08.1968.
(iii) Appellant No.2 filed a suit in OS No.459 of 1990 on the file of the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur for declaration of her title and for permanent injunction with respect to subject property, wherein the Endowments Department is not a party.
(iv) It is further averred that, at Para No.7 of the plaint, it was mentioned that, in view of construction of departmental choultries and private accommodations for the pilgrims for the last more than two decades, no pilgrim preferred to stay in the western block and as such, the family of the Plaintiffs/Appellants is using the entire petition /plaint schedule property openly, uninterruptedly and unobjectionably to the knowledge of each and everybody of that vicinity including the Respondent/Defendant. The title was perfected by adverse possession.
Hence, prayed for dismissal of the appeals.
5. The grounds urged in this appeal are as follows:
i) Learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate the question of fact and law in a right perspective.
ii) Learned Tribunal failed to consider the fact that Respondent No.1/Petitioner will not come under the definition of ‘person having interest’ as defined under Section 2(18) of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 and he has no locus standi.
iii) No document has been filed to show that the property of Sri Muvvala Venkata Subba Rao and Amara Venkateswarlu was given to the Vysya Choultry for public charitab
