THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA W.P.No.16660 OF 2006 O R D E R:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice T.Vinod Kumar)

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the order dt.21.06.2006 passed in LGC.No.37 of 2003 by the Special Court under AP Land Grabbing(Prohibition )Act (for short ‘the Act’) at Hyderabad.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Ch.Ravinder, learned counsel for respondent No.1, Sri V.Venkateshwar Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2, and perused the record.

3. The petitioner Nos.1 & 2 herein are respondent Nos.2 & 3 before the Special Court and petitioner No.3 has been impleaded in the present proceeding as 3^rd petitioner being LR of 2^nd petitioner herein, who it is stated had deceased during pendency of the present writ petition.

4. The 1st respondent herein is the applicant before the Special Court.

Background of the case:

5. The 1st respondent herein had filed the underlying application before the Special Court under Section 8(1) of the Act claiming that his land to an extent of 1,762 sq. yards in Sy.No.696 situated in Malkajgiri Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, has been grabbed by the respondent Nos.1 to 3 therein, without any valid entitlement or title, and thus, are to be declared as land grabbers.

6. The 1^st respondent/applicant before the Special Court claimed that out of 1762 sq. yards of land, the 1^st respondent grabbed land to an extent of 496.6 sq. yards, the 2nd respondent grabbed land to an extent of 931.9 sq. yards and the 3^rd respondent grabbed land to an extent of 334.8 sq. yards, respectively, and thus, sought to direct the respondents jointly and severally to vacate the application schedule land and to deliver vacant and peaceful possession of the application schedule land to the applicant.

7. On the Special Court taking cognizance of the aforesaid application and issuing notification by publishing the same in the Gazette, no objections have been received.

8. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 before the Special Court, on being issued with the notices in the aforesaid LGC, have filed their counter through the 3rd respondent/2nd petitioner herein.

9. By the counter affidavit filed, the 3rd respondent while admitting that the land in survey No.696 originally belonged to the applicant’s father, however, denied the claim of the applicant that his father had kept small portion consisting of 2000 sq. yards for the purpose of future family needs while selling away the remaining extent of land by making plots.

10. By the counter affidavit the 3^rd respondent further claimed that his mother Smt R.Kousalya Yadav is the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acres 2.06 guntas in Sy.No.698 situated on the western side of the applicant’s land in Sy.No.696 and having pattadar pass book for the said extent of land; that the applicant’s family and respondents’ family members fixed boundaries in respect of their land 25 years back itself; that applicant’s family elders constructed a room on the boundary of their land towards 3^rd respondent land; that after fixing boundaries, the applicant and his elders made a layout for their land and sold the entire property 25 years back itself; that when the respondents’ family members divided their property by way of gift deed and started developing the land, and seeing the land being developed, the applicant started creating disturbance on the 3^rd respondent’s land in order to extort money; and that the applicant started raising disputes only after the applicant’s father having deceased in the year

1999.

11. The 3^rd respondent by the counter affidavit further contended that the 1^st respondent/applicant filed a suit for injunction against the applicant vide O.S. No.88 of 2003 on the file of the Prl. Junior Civil Judge, East and North, Ranga Reddy District, however, was not successful in getting any injunction therein.

12. By the counter affidavit it is further contended that the claim of the applicant that the 1^st respondent havi