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

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 16221

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
B Ashok reddy – Appellant
Versus
Prl.Secy. Revenue dept. – Respondent
WP 44700/2017



##PAGE1##

::1::

2025:APHC:57849

APHC011026522017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3329]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU

NIMMAGADDA

Review IA No. 1 and I.A.No.2 OF 2023

IN

WRIT PETITION NO: 44700/2017

Between:

1. B ASHOK REDDY, S/O B. THIPPANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT

59 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O D.NO.261, KANAKASRI

NILAYA, FLAT NO.7, NIJALINGAPPA LAYOUT, NEARBY

NATIONAL CONVENT, DEVNAGERE TOWN, DEVNAGERE

DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. P RL SECY REVENUE DEPT, THE STATE OF ANDHRA

PRADESH REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

REVENUE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT,

VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVAHTI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA

PRADESH STATE.

2. T HE JOINT COLLECTOR, ANANTAPUR, . ANANTAPURAMU

DISTRICT.

3. T HE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ANANTAPUR,

ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.

##PAGE2##

::2::

2025:APHC:57849

4. T HE TAHSILDAR, VAJRAKARURU MANDAL,

ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.

5. S MT R GOWRAMMA, D/O LATE RACHANA GOUD, AGED

ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC.AGRICULTURE, R/O C/O P.

SHANKAR GOUD, GULAPALYAM (VIL), VAJRAKARURU

MANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.

6. P PAMPANA GOUD, S/O LATE RACHANA GOUD AGED

ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC.AGRICULTURE R/O C/O P.

SHANKAR GOUD, GULAPALYAM (VIL), VAJRAKARURU

MANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Pleased to review the order dated 16-08-2023 passed in Writ

Petition No. 44700/2017 and to pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. CH C KRISHNA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

2. B S VENKATA RAMESH

##PAGE3##

::3::

2025:APHC:57849

Reserved on : 19.11.2025

Pronounced on : 31.12.2025

Uploaded on : 02.01.2026

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

Review I.A.No.1 and I.A.No.2 of 2023

IN

WRIT PETITION No.44700 of 2017

Review I.A.No.1 of 2023

This court made the following

ORDER

The present review application is filed by the writ petitioner

praying that the orders dated 16.08.2023 passed by this Hon’ble

Court in W.P.No.44700 of 2017 to be reviewed.

2. This Hon’ble Court passed orders dated 16.08.2023 in

W.P.No.44700 of 2017 as under:

“16. The unofficial respondents/Respondent Nos.5 & 6 happen to

be the offspring of late P. Rachana Gowd. Meanwhile, the

petitioner acquired the property in question from P. Kumar Gowd,

who is also a son of the deceased P. Rachana Gowd. Notably, P.

Rachana Gowd is deceased. Evidently, a significant conflict

regarding the title and ownership of the subject property has

arisen between the petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 & 6.

17. It is to be noted that, the petitioner has been seeking a relief

with regard to change of entries in the revenue records only on the

##PAGE4##

::4::

2025:APHC:57849

basis of Agreement of Sale. That itself indicates that there is any

amount of dispute about the possession and title of the petitioner

particularly in view of the matter being seriously disputed by

Respondent Nos.5 & 6. In other words, maintaining this writ

petition means indirectly seeking the verdict on the disputed

question of title and possession which has to be dissuaded by all

means. Therefore, this question of title and possession is purely in

the nature of question of fact but cannot be decided by an

authority like the official respondents. Until and unless the title of

such a disputed property is decided one way or the other,

necessary changes of entries in the revenue record cannot be

effected by the revenue officials under the Act. Hence, it is

expedient for the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court

in order to get the title dispute settled in his favour and then only

approach the authorities under the Act for appropriate relief.”

3. Learned counsel for the review petitioner sought for review of

the order of this Court on the ground that in view of ratio laid down by

erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Ratnamma Vs The

Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmavaram, Ananthapur District

in W.P. No. 21689 of 1999, dated 24.07.2015, no appeal under

Section 5(5) of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbooks Act,

1971 (for short “the Act”) is

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