A land title claim cannot be raised after a significant delay; jurisdiction lies with the Civil Court for disputed ownership.

The Court made the following Order:

The Writ Petition was filed by the three petitioners. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, all the three petitioners have passed away and their legal representatives were brought on record as the Petitioners 4 to 8.

2. The petitioners claim ownership and possession over Ac.43.20 cents of land, in Sy.No.164-6 of Julakaluva Village, Singanamala Mandal, Ananathapuram District, Andhra Pradesh. This land is said to have been purchased from the grandfather of the 6^th respondent, by way of registered sale deeds, in the years 1939, 1943, 1944 and 1951, by the father of the deceased petitioners 1 to 3. The case of the petitioners 1 to 3 is that, an extent of Ac.46.60 cents had been purchased initially. However, the father of the petitioners 1 to 3, during his lifetime, had sold away Ac.3.36 cents of land in favour of third parties and Ac.43.20 cents remained with the family of the petitioners. The names of the petitioners 1 to 3 are also said to have been mutated in the revenue records as pattadars and possessors over these lands. In the year 1972, a partition is said to have been effected between the petitioners 1 to 3 and their father, on account of which, the names of the petitioners 1 to 3 were entered in the revenue record as pattadars and possessors over Ac.12.75 cents, Ac.13.70 cents and Ac.16.75 cents of lands, respectively, in the names of the petitioners 1 to 3, in survey No.164-6(B). The pattadar pass books and title deeds had been issued in the favour of the petitioners, in the year 1988. The petitioners would additionally contend that the father of the petitioners had obtained certain loans, in the year 1950, for development of this land and that he had deposited the title deeds of these lands with the Government in respect of Ac.46.60 cents.

3. The 6^threspondent, made a representation under Section 6-A of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 [for short “the Act, 1971”], on 30.07.2014, before the 5^th respondent-Tahsildar, for issuance of pattadar pass books and title deeds to an extent of Ac.12.10 cents, in Sy.No.164-6 on the ground that there was a registered partition between himself and other family members, executed on 29.01.2014, under which this land had fallen to the share of the 6^th respondent. This representation was refused by the 5^th respondent, by way an endorsement, dated 23.08.2014, in file No.199/2014/B, on the ground that there was no vacant land available in this survey number and all the land was already shown in the names of different pattadars. Aggrieved by this endorsement, the 6^th respondent approached the 4^th respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer. The said 4^th respondent-RDO after verifying the records, had dismissed the appeal of the 6^th respondent by an Order, dated 07.03.2015, in file No.D.Dis.No.D2/5629/2014, on the ground that the land in question was private patta land and as there are complicated facts, it would be appropriate that the case is decided by a competent Civil Court.

4. The 6^th respondent aggrieved by these observations, filed a revision before the 3^rd respondent-Joint Collector. At that stage, the 2^nd respondent-District Collector, though the revision was filed before the Joint Collector, sought a report from the 4^th respondent. The 4^th respondent-RDO then submitted a detailed report, dated 11.04.2017, vide Rc.No.5629/D2/2014, wherein it was stated that the total extent of land, in Sy.No.164 was Ac.74.49 cents while the available land was only Ac.49.00 cents, in Sy.No.164-1 to 164- 5. The report also stated that an extent of Ac.46.60 cents