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)(Tel) 14287

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
G.RADHA RAN, J
defendant No.4 – Appellant
Versus
Legal Representatives of the plaintiff – Respondent
C.C.C.A.Nos.121 & 122 of 2008



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, Sri B.Adinarayana, Sri L.Ravi Chander, Sri Mayur Mundra
For the Respondents: Sri S.Malla Rao

A civil court has jurisdiction to adjudicate land title disputes even under cooperative societies' regulations, requiring formal procedures for cancellation of registered deeds.

Headnote:(A) AP Co-operative Societies Act, 1964 - Sections 61 and 126 - Suit for declaration of title and injunction concerning land - Plaintiff alleges unlawful cancellation of sale deed by the Society - Defendants argue the suit is barred due to statutory notice requirements and limitation - Trial Court decrees in favor of the plaintiff. (Paras 1-56)

(B) The Court held that a suit regarding a landed title could be adjudicated in Civil Court despite claims of jurisdiction under Co-operative Societies Act - Unilateral cancellation of a registered document requires judicial proceedings. (Paras 52-56)

(C) On the issue of limitation, it was found that the plaintiff pursued a Writ Petition in good faith that paused the limitation period under Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963. (Paras 34-46)

COMMON JUDGMENT:

Both these appeals are arising out of the judgment and decree dated 11.03.2008 passed in O.S.No.410 of 2004 by the learned III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. C.C.C.A.121 of 2008 is filed by defendant No.4 and C.C.C.A.122 of 2008 is filed by defendants 1 to

3. The respondent No.1 in both the appeals is the original plaintiff. Since the respondent No.1 – plaintiff died, his legal representatives are brought on record as respondents 5 to 7 in C.C.C.A.No.121 of 2008 and as respondents 3 to 5 in C.C.C.A.No.122 of 2008.

3. The parties are hereinafter referred as arrayed before the trial court as plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4.

4. The suit O.S.No.410 of 2004 was filed by the plaintiff seeking the relief of declaration of title and consequential injunction in respect of the suit schedule plot bearing No.15 (described as 15A & 15B) in M/s.Vijaya Co- operative House Building Society (for short “Society”) admeasuring 600 square yards in Survey Nos.125 and 126 of Yousufguda Village, in Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad and for perpetual injunction to restrain the defendants or anyone claiming through them from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit land and to restrain the defendants or anyone claiming through them from transferring or conveying or encumbering the suit schedule property in any manner. The suit was originally filed against defendants 1 to 3. Subsequently, Vijaya Co-operative House Building Society – defendant no.4 was added as a party as per the orders in I.A.No.291 of 2005 dated 27.07.2005. The plaintiff was a Government Servant. As per the case of the plaintiff, M/s.Vijaya Co-operative House Building Society (defendant No.4) approached the Government of Andhra Pradesh requesting the Government to alienate an extent of Ac.77-14 cents of land situated in Survey Nos.125 and 126 situated at Yousufguda Village, Golconda Mandal, Hyderabad District. The Government of Andhra Pradesh acceded to the request of defendant No.4 - Society and after receiving an amount of Rs.15,47,000/- executed a sale deed dated 13.04.1994 in favor of the Society. After purchase of the land under the sale deed, the Society approached the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (for short “MCH”) seeking a layout sanction and the MCH accorded sanction of layout to the Society. The defendant No.4 Society came into existence only to see that the Members of the Legislative Assembly (for short “MLAs) as well as the Members of Parliament (for short “MPs”) were allotted house plots for construction of houses. After allotting and registering house plots to the MLAs and MPs, the Society found that there were some excess plots. The Society having regard to the assistance given by the plaintiff in getting all the clearances including the sale deed as well as the layout sanction, requested him to become a member of the Society and impressed upon the plaintiff that in the event if the plaintiff become a member of the Society, it would alienate an extent of 600 square yards of land from some of the plots that remained unsold. The said facility was also extended to similarly situated persons like that of the plaintiff. Accordingly, the plaintiff became member of the Society by paying a share capital and admission fee. Pursuant thereto, the Society having received a total consideration of Rs.1,11,000/- through account payee cheque executed a registered sale deed bearing document No.4509 of 1994 dated 31.10.1994 in favor of the plaintiff alienating plot No.15 admeasuring 600 square yards with the following boundaries viz., North: Plot No.14, South: Plot No.16, East: 40'wide road, West: Plot No.18 and put the plaintiff in physical and vacant possession of the said plot. Since the date of alienation, the plaintiff was in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property as its exclusive owner and possessor. The defendant No. 4 society on 05.03.2001 called upon the plaintiff to pay a further sum of Rs.25,

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