The High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution, will not adjudicate upon disputed questions of title or ownership when there are competing claims based on inheritance and registered sale deeds, particularly where a civil court has already decreed a permanent injunction regarding the subject property.

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed with the following prayer:

“… to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in recording the name of the 4th respondent as pattedar and possessor in the Revenue records in respect of the land in Sy.No.201 to an extent of Ac. 2.20 Gts., situated at Lingapuram Village of Boyalagudem Revenue Village of Gattu Mandal Mahabubnagar District, as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 besides violation of principles of natural justice without notice and enquiry and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to restore the names of petitioners in pattedar and possessory columns in pahanies for the Fasli Year 1424 (2014) and 2015 and also in relevant Revenue records in respect of the land in Sy.No.201 to an extent of Ac.1.10 Gts. each (total Ac.2.20 Gts.,) situated at Lingapuram Village of Boyalagudem Revenue Village of Gattu Mandal Mahabubnagar District, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

Heard Mr. M. Ramalingeswara Reddy, learned counsel for petitioners, and Ms. Dara Haritha Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Case of petitioners is that they are the absolute owners and possessors of agricultural lands to an extent of Ac.1.10 guntas each (totaling to Acs.2.20 guntas) in Survey No.201 situated at Lingapuram Village of Boyalagudem Revenue Village of Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, that it was inherited from their ancestors. That their grandfather, Kummari Jammanna, S/o. Chinna Linganna, was the pattadar and possessor of the subject land and after his death, petitioners’ father, Kummari Venkanna, inherited the said land and subsequently, the said land was inherited by petitioners and they were issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds.

After death of petitioners’ father, petitioners applied for change of patta in their favour. By proceedings in AMR No.124/2012, dated 27.12.2012, the Tahsildar (respondent No.3) transferred the patta in their favour in respect of the land in Survey No.201/A, along with other survey numbers, and issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds.

That in the year 2014, name of respondent No.4 (unofficial respondent) was reflected in the pattadar and possessor column. That petitioners got issued a legal notice dated 18.08.2015 to Tahsildar (respondent No.3) for making wrong entries in the pahanies and to delete the name of respondent No.4 in the revenue records.

It is further the case of petitioners that respondent No.4, with the assistance of local ruling party leaders, made wrongful entries in the revenue records, depriving the rights of petitioners, though the name of petitioners grandfather is reflected in Khasra Pahani. Petitioners submit that they have neither sold nor mortgaged the subject land, nor entered into any agreement of sale in respect of the subject property. It is further stated that the respondent authorities did not conduct any enquiry or issue any notice to the petitioners before updating or correcting the entries in the revenue records. Hence, petitioners seek indulgence of this Court to restore the name of petitioners in the revenue records in respect of land in Survey No.201 to an extent of Ac.1.10 guntas each situated at Lingapuram Village, Boyalagudem Revenue Village, Gattu Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioners that petitioners’ grandfather was the original owner and possessor of land to an extent of Acs.2.20 guntas in Survey No.201, that the same is their ancestral property, inherited from their grandfather, petitioners were issued pattadar passbooks and title deeds and were in possession and enjoyment of the property. It is further submitted that petitioners made an application for mutation of their na