The court reaffirmed that unauthorized changes in land records without due process violate principles of natural justice and cannot substantiate claims of ownership less than legal title.

Common Judgment: (per Ch. Manavendranath Roy, J.)

These two writ appeals are preferred challenging the legal validity of the order dated 24-3-2025 of the learned single Judge passed in W.P.No.21407 of 2008. Therefore, these two appeals are heard together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Respondent Nos.4 to 8 in W.P.No.21407 of 2008 are the appellants in W.A.No.397 of 2025. The appellant in W.A.No.404 of 2025 is the subsequent purchaser of the subject property from respondents 4 to 8 in W.P.No.21407 of 2008 during the pendency of the writ petition. Therefore, they sought leave to challenge the impugned order of the learned single Judge by preferring an appeal against the said order. Leave was granted as per order 27-02-2026 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2025.

3. Parties will be referred as they are arrayed in the writ petition for the sake of convenience.

4. Heard Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri Valluru Chetan Susheel, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri D.S. Siva Darshan, learned counsel for the respondents 6 and 7/implead parties in W.A.No.397 of 2025, Sri M.R.K. Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri D.S. Siva Darshan, learned counsel for the respondents 11 and 12/ implead parties in W.A.No.404 of 2025.

5. Brief overview of the facts leading to the lis germane to dispose of these appeals may be stated as follows:

A person, by name Jethalal Haridas Joisher, was the original owner of the subject property, which is in an extent of Ac.1,847.67 cents covered by Survey Nos.80-1, 81, 93, 65, 83, 73-2, 97, 94, 67 and 99 situated at Gudipalli village and covered by Survey No.733-2 of Somandepalli village in Anantapur District. He purchased the said land long back in the year 1949 under a registered sale deed dated 20-9-1949. Thereafter, he along with his son and other family members started a business in 1953 in part of the said land under the name and style “Jethalal and Company”. A firm was constituted by him along with his son and other family members. The said firm was subsequently dissolved and again another firm in the name and style “Bhanusali Sissal Fibre Industry and Plantations” was constituted and they continued the said business. Therefore, the name of owner of the said land Jethalal Haridas Joisher was shown as owner in all the Revenue records and his name was incorporated as owner and possessor of the said land. As they had to stay in Bombay, they have executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of writ petitioner No.1, by name Pratap C. Joisher, to look after the management and other affairs of the said business. Therefore, he has been looking after the affairs of the said business of the firm. While so, the writ petitioners entertained an evil idea of grabbing the said property and made an attempt to sell away the said property claiming themselves as the owners of the property. Therefore, Jethalal Haridas Joisher, who is the original owner of the property and his son filed a suit in O.S.No.7 of 1996 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Penukonda for permanent injunction restraining the petitioners and others from interfering in any manner with the administration and possession of Bhanusali Sissal Fibre Industry and Plantations and properties of the lands appurtenant to it, against the first writ petitioner and others. Writ petitioner No.1 contested the said suit. He denied the title of the plaintiff th