PURELI CHANDRAIAH Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR KARIMNAGAR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner herein has questioned the validity of the order of the 3rd respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer of Pegadapalli Mandal of Karimnagar District, dated 4.6.1996, passed in Proceedings No.B/403/93, by which, he has confirmed the earlier order, dated 16.12.1991, passed in File No.ROR/489/488/ 490/89-91, in exercise of powers under Section 5-A of the A.P. Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and the order of the appellate authority, dated 23.12.2004, passed in Proceedings No.D1/4516/97.

(2.) ONE Sri Mudugunti Anantha Reddy was owner and possessor of land admeasuring Acs.9.03 gts., covered by Sy.No.l53/B of Aravelli Village of Pegadapally Mandal in Karimnagar District. The petitioner claims that he has purchased the land admeasuring Acs.6.32 gts. in the aforesaid survey number jointly along with respondents 4 and 5, vide registered sale deed, dated 27.11.1970, bearing Document No.3555/70. He also claims to have purchased another piece of land admeasuring Acs.2.11 gts. in the same survey number along with respondent No.5 vide registered document, dated 29.12.1971, bearing Document No.3104/71. It is his case that he was having l/3rd share in the land admeasuring Acs.6.32 gts., and half share in the land admeasuring Acs.2.11 gts., and when there was a dispute between the joint owners, it is stated that the petitioner had filed suits in OS Nos.125 and 126 of 1976 on the file of District Munsiff, Jagtial, seeking partition and separate possession of his share. The said suits were decreed finally by final decree, dated 29th January 1987, and it is stated that in the execution proceedings in EP Nos.7 and 8 of 1987, he was also put in possession of his share in terms of the final decree, on 10.9.1987, and since then, he is in possession of the aforesaid land. At that stage, it appears, respondents 4 to 6, claiming purchase of the entire land admeasuring Acs.9.03 gts., covered by Survey No.l53/B by way of unregistered sale deed from the original owner Sri Anantha Reddy in the year 1968, filed an application under Section 5-A of the Act, seeking regularization of alienation. At first instance, the 3rd respondent-Mandal Revenue Officer passed the order, dated 16th December 1991, validating the sale, as against which, the petitioner herein preferred appeal before the 2nd respondent, who by his order, dated 11.7.1993, allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the 3rd respondent to conduct de-nova inquiry and pass appropriate orders.

(3.) IN this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that as much as the petitioner has purchased the land along with respondents 4 to 5 by registered sale deeds bearing Document Nos.3555/70 and 3104/ 71, dated 27.11.1970 and 29.12.1971 respectively, and as he was also put in possession of his share pursuant to the final decree passed by the learned District Munsiff, Jagtial, the 3rd respondent has no authority or jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 5-A of the Act, to regularize the alienation claimed by respondents 4 to 6 in the year 1968. It is stated that the said unregistered document of 1968 is a false and concocted document, brought into existence by respondents 4 to 6 in collusion with the original owner Sri M. Anantha Reddy. It is also his case that inspite of filing documentary evidence i.e. certified copies of registered sale deeds and final decrees passed in OS Nos.125 and 126 of 1976, the appellate and revisional authorities, without considering the matter in proper perspective, refused to accept the said documents merely basing on the statement made by the original owner, who has colluded with respondents 4 to 6.