AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Sri P.Sri Harsha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No.5.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in connection with order passed by the respondent No.2 in case No.F3/Special Tribunal/ Siddipet(U)/ 16/2021, dated 25.10.2021.
The facts of the case leading to passing of the impugned order are as under:-
The petitioner and respondent No.5 herein are the natural brothers. Respondent No.5 herein claims that his father was holding an extent of Acs.4.00 gts., in his name as Pattadar and the said extent of land was inherited by the petitioner and respondent No.5 herein and thereby, they are entitled for Acs.2.00 gts., each out of the said Acs.4.00 gts., of land situated in Sy.No.56/5 of Ponnala Village, Siddipet Urban Mandal, Siddipet District.
Thus, claiming so, respondent No.5 herein approached respondent No.4 herein requesting for copies of the mutation proceedings, mutating the said extent of land solely in the name of the petitioner herein and also got issued a legal notice. However, having failed to get any proper response from respondent No.4 herein, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 5(B) of Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, (for short “the Act, 1971”) before respondent No.3 herein in appeal case No.D/2960/2016. The said appeal filed by respondent No.5 herein was allowed by respondent No.3 by an order, dated 25.08.2018 holding as under:-
“As per compromise petition filed by the appellant, respondent and other family members before the Senior Civil Judge, Siddipet in I.A.No. of 2013 O.S.No.65/2010, the appellant and respondent is having equal shares @ Acs.4.00 gts., each out of Acs.10.01 gts. But actually their father was having Acs.4.04 gts., only for which the appellant and respondent are entitled for succession with equal share under Section 8 of Hindu Succession Act,1956.
The respondent failed to submit any document through which he acquired property to an extent of Acs.4.00 gts., exclusively for himself. As per the compromise before the Lok Adalat, both are having equal shares but from the 2004-05, the name of respondent alone recorded in the Pahanies without any document.
In view of the above facts, the appeal is allowed reducing the Patta of respondent No.1 for an extent of Acs.2.00 gts., instead of Acs.4.00 gts., and the Tahsildar is directed to mutate Acs.2.00 gts., in favor of appellant within one month from the date of this order”.
Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner herein filed revision under Section 9 of Act, 1971, before the Joint Collector, Siddipet District and the said revision petition came to be transferred to the Special Tribunal constituted under Section 16 of Telangana Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books, Act, 2020, and the same was disposed of through the impugned order holding as under:-
“From the above table it is clearly established that Sri Balije Veeraiah S/o Rajaiah has sold out an extent of Acs.7.35 gts., out of his total extent i.e., Acs.10.01 gts., and an extent of Acs.2.06 gts., retained in his name and this facts have been not represented by both the parties before the Civil Court nor the Special Tribunal Siddipet. Since both the petitioner and respondent are LRs of Balije Veeraiah, who is the original owner of the land in Sy.No.56 to an extent Acs.2.06 gts., situated at Ponnala Village of Siddipet Urban Mandal. Both are having equal rights in land leftover by Sri Balije Veeraiah S/o Rajaiah.
As such it is ordered to record the name of petitioner and respondent equally for the balance land to an extent of Acs.2.06 gts., in respect of Sy.No.56 of Ponnala Village of Siddipet Urban Mandal”.
Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.
The admitted facts are that the petitioner herein and respondent No.5 are the natural brothers. The petitioner herein filed O.S.No.53/2011 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Siddipet seeking declaration of title and injunction in respect of various landed properties including the land admeasuring Acs.4.00 gts., situated in Sy.No.56 which is the subject matter of present Writ Petition. Where as respondent No.5 filed O.S.No.53/2011 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge at Siddipet for partition and separate possession of various landed properties, but respondent No.5 has not included the land situated in Sy.No.56 in the suit schedule properties in the said suit. Both the above referred suits came to be compromised before the Lok Adalat and a Lok Adalat Award dated 20.12.2013 came to be passed in O.S.No.65/2010 between the petitioner and respondent No.5 and others .
A perusal of the said terms of compromise, as recorded by an Award passed by the Lok Adalat, shows that the petitioner and respondent No.5 are entitled for Acs.4.00 gts., each in Sy.No.56 and the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 herein have categorically agreed not to raise any disputes with regard to the property shown against them respectively in the tables mentioned in the said award. As already noted above, the petitioner herein and respondent No.5 are agreed to be entitled for Acs.4.00 gts., each in the land situated in Sy.No.56 of the Village in question. It is also evident from the said award that the parties to the award agreed, not to dispute the alienations made by them individually out of their extents referred in table A and any such alienations are agreed to be within the extent shown in the table against each of the individual. The contents of the award are not disputed by any of the parties. As noted above, in terms of the above the petitioner herein is entitled to hold Acs.4.00 gts., of land in Sy.No.56 and the said extent of land also stands mutated in the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. However, respondent No.5 herein in the year of 2016, that is three (03) years after passing of the above referred award, approached respondent No.3 and 4 seeking rectification of entries on the ground that his father was only holding Acs.4.00 gts., of land in Sy.No.56 and the said entire extent of land is got mutated by the petitioner in his name ignoring the claim of respondent No.5 and the said claim of respondent No.5 is accepted by respondent No.3 ignoring the award passed by the Lok Adalat inter se parties by misreading the contents of the Award and the same came to be confirmed by the Special Tribunal through the impugned order, as noted above.
In the absence of any dispute with regard to the contents of the Award, dated 20.12.2013, the same is binding on the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 herein. In terms of the said award, the petitioner herein is entitled to hold Acs.4.00 gts., of land in Sy.No.56 of Village in question. Admittedly the petitioner is having only Acs.4.00 gts., standing in his name. If at all respondent No.5 has got any claim in respect of land in Sy.No.56, it is for respondent No.5 to claim the same de horse the land that is standing in the name of petitioner herein. But that is not the case of respondent No.5 herein. On the contrary, respondent No.5 approached respondent No.3 by setting up a totally different claim contrary to the contents of the Award. However, respondent No.3 herein as well as respondent No.2 Special Tribunal failed to appreciate the Award, dated 20.12.2013 passed by the Lok Adalat inter se parties and totally misread the contents of the said Award and went beyond scope of Award and considered the claim of respondent No.5 herein contrary to the mutually agreed and binding terms.
In the light of the above this Court has no hesitation to hold that respondent No.3 as well as respondent No.2 herein have exceeded their jurisdiction and ventured to adjudicate the claim raised by respondent No.5 herein which is not otherwise within the jurisdiction of respondent Nos.2 and 3 though the petitioner herein has brought to the notice of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 about the Award passed by the Lok Adalat. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein ought to have restrained themselves from adjudicating the claim made by respondent No.5 in the teeth of the Award passed by the Lok Adalat which has the force of a Decree passed by a Civil Court, but respondent Nos.2 and 3 have thus exceeded their jurisdiction, resulting in passing of the impugned order.
In the circumstances, as already observed above this Court has no hesitation to hold that respondent No.3 herein has exceeded his jurisdiction and entered into the arena which otherwise falls within the jurisdiction of the competent Civil Court and passed the order dated 25.08.2018 and the same is erroneously confirmed by respondent No.2 herein.
In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 25.10.2021 passed by respondent No.2 Special Tribunal confirming the order passed by respondent No.3 herein in case No.D/2960/2016, dated 25.08.2018 are wholly unsustainable and the same are hereby quashed. The Writ Petition is allowed directing respondent No.4 to restore the entries in the Revenue records in respect of land admeasuring Acs.4.00 gts., situated in Sy.No.56 of Ponnala Village, Siddipet Urban Mandal, Siddipet District in the name of the petitioner and take all consequential steps in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.