SEETHAMMA AND ORS. Vs. THE TAHASILDAR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant is before this Court assailing the judgment dated 20.07.2011 passed in RA No. 14/2000. By the said judgment, the Lower Appellate Court has set aside the judgment and decree dated 30.11.1999 passed in O.S. No. 25/1991 by the trial Court whereby the declaration as sought for by the plaintiff was granted.

(2.) THE Lower Appellate Court while arriving at its conclusion though has taken note of the fact that the plaintiff was claiming Kumki privilege in respect of the 'B' schedule properties adjoining the 'A' schedule lands which belonged to the plaintiff, has arrived at the conclusion that in view of the documents marked as Exhs. D1 and D2, the right of enjoyment of the Kumki privilege in favour of the plaintiff did not exist and without challenging such orders before the appropriate authorities, a declaration before the Civil Court could not have been sought. The Lower Appellate Court has also arrived at the conclusion that the suit without issue of prior notice was not maintainable under Section 80 of CPC. In the light of such conclusion reached by the Lower Appellate Court, this Court while admitting the appeal on 30.11.2011 has formulated the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Government Advocate and perused the appeal papers including the records received from the Court below.