THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA WRIT PETITION No. 13192 of 2010 &

CONTEMPT CASE No. 232 of 2022 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice T. Vinod Kumar Since, the issue involved in this Writ Petition and the Contempt Case are inter-connected both the matters are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners, with the following prayer:

It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Certiorari calling the records in LGA.No.13/2008 dated 18.01.2010 passed by Special Court Under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act Hyderabad, setting aside the Judgment and decree in LGA.No. 13/2008, dated 18.01.2010, on the file of Special Court Under A.P.Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act Hyderabad and also the Order and Decree dated 27.09.2007, passed by the Special Tribunal Cum III Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and consequently direct the Respondents 1 & 2 to deliver the possession of the premises bearing H.No.1-7-553 to 556 admeasuring 216 Sq.yds situated at Zamistanpur, Hyderabad to Petitioners and pass such other order or orders this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

3. Petitioners in the Writ Petition are the petitioners/applicant in the LGOP No.39 of 1997 and LGA No. 13 of 2008. The Special Tribunal-Cum-III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (in short ‘Special Tribunal) in LGOP No.39 of 1997 vide order dt.27.09.2007 and the Special Court Under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act Hyderabad (for short ‘Special Court) in LGA No.13 of 2008 vide judgment dated 18.01.2010 held that the petitioners/appellants herein failed to prove the respondents herein as ‘land grabbers’ and dismissed the same. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Special Court in LGA No.13 of 2008, the present Writ Petition is filed.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that, their father M. Shankaraiah was the absolute owner and possessor of the subject property bearing No.1-7-553 to 556 admeasuring 216 Sq Yds situated at Zamisthanpur, Hyderabad, which was purchased vide Registered Sale Deed dated 17.06.1970 from one M. Jagannatha Swamy and N.Sarojanamma along with her sister viz., Anusuyamma.

5. Petitioners contend that, as on the date of Sale there were tenants existing in the property and subsequent to the purchase of the property, the father of the petitioners used to collect the rents from tenants. When the tenants had defaulted in paying the rents, he filed RC.Nos.181 to 187 of 1973, in the Court of Rent Controller at Hyderabad. Subsequent to the death of M Shankaraiah, the respondent Nos.1 & 2 i.e. legal heirs of the vendors had illegally grabbed the property. Challenging the illegal occupation of the subject property by the respondents, the petitioners had filed LGOP. No.39 of 1997 before the Special Tribunal.

6. Petitioners contend that, the Special Tribunal after considering the evidence had erroneously dismissed the LGOP No.39 of 1997 vide order dated 27.09.2007, contrary to the contents of the Registered sale deed, Ex.A-l i.e. Original Registered Sale Deed in favour of M Shankaraiah wherein it is stated that the possession was delivered to M Shankaraiah as on the date of execution of registered sale deed.

7. It is contended that, the respondent.No.2 produced the Xerox and Carbon copy of Agreement of sale which had no signatures of M Shankaraiah and it was concluded that on the date of execution of sale deed itself, he had entered into agreement of sale with the respondent No.2’s father i.e. Jagannatha Swamy. Thus, the Special Tribunal by considering the aforesaid evidence observed that the possession was not delivered to the petitioner’s father i.e. M Shankaraiah.

8. The petitioners contend that, the Special Tribunal grossly erred in accepting the said evidenc