C. BALAKONDANNA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners are in long possession and enjoyment of the property having purchased the same under the registered sale deed, and their names were also mutated in the revenue records. While the matter stood thus, notice dated 18.06.2020 was issued under Section 7 of Madras Act 03 of 1905 to the petitioners.

(3.) The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are in long possession and enjoyment of the property having purchased the same under registered sale deed and their names were also mutated in the revenue records. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be dispossessed by exercising power under Section 7 of the Madras Act. When the petitioners are in settled possession of the property, the remedy open to the respondents is to approach the Civil Court in view of the guidelines issued by the Apex Court in "Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Thummala Krishna Rao, 1982 AIR(SC) 1081". Instead of approaching the Civil Court to establish the title by respondent No.4, he issued notice under Section 7 of the Madras Act, invoking summary procedure to evict the petitioners from the land, requested to allow the writ petition.