SALEEMA G RATTANSEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the L.P.As are directed against the judgment and decree of the learned Single Judge in C.C.C.A.No. 211 of 1982, dated 19-12-1997 setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court in O.S.No. 606 of 1971 on the file of the in Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, dated 19-4-1978. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree, some of the Defendants filed C.C.C.A.No. 60 of 1998 and some others filed C.C.C.A.No. 62 of 1998. LP.A.No. 60 of 1998 was filed by the pendent lite purchasers, who came on record during the pendency of the appeal before the learned Single Judge.

(2.) Appellant is the Plaintiff. The suit was filed for declaration of title and for possession. As per the averments made in the plaint, it is the case of the Plaintiff that the plot of measuring Ac. 12-79 cents forming part of Ex-Jagir Yapral village was situated within the Secunderabad Cantonment Board boundary. It is comprised of General Land Register S.No. 151 maintained by the Secunderabad Cantonment Board. The said Register was prepared in 1932-33. It is stated that the Defendant is the brother of one Gopal Reddy. They are said to be pattedars for an extent of 62 acres in Yapral village and records are not available for that extent of 9 acres, which falls outside the Cantonment bounds. The Defendant encroached on the Government land to the extent of 9 acres covered by G.L.R. Sy.Nos. 150 and 157 which are adjoining Piagah lands in S.No. 151. It is also stated that G.L.R. Sy. Nos. 150 and 157 corresponds to Revenue S.Nos. 214, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221,223,224, 225 and 226. All these lands are classified as 'A' class lands in possession of the military authorities. Survey of India Maps of 1900 and 1918-19 will vouch this situation. These lands are being leased for grazing purposes. It is stated that certain lands falling inside and outside Secunderabad was requisitioned by the civil authorities during the 2nd World War. So also, the land of the ancestors of the Appellant. Accordingly, they were paid the compensation. However, after the requirement was over, the land was released by a relinquishment certificate issued by the Second Talukdar Bhagat on 15-10-1947. It is stated that even though the compensation was paid on account of the requisitioning of the land in Yapral village, but the title in respect of those lands did not vest with the Defendants or their ancestors. It is stated that the Defendants removed the boundary stones and tried to encroach the land.

(3.) The Plaintiff traced their title from 1904 wherein about 200 acres of land from Yapral village and Kowkoor village were acquired by late H.E.H. the Nizam for occupation of the military authorities and the said lands were given to the Union Government without receiving any payment. These records were prepared in 1932-33 and thus the Plaintiff-Union Government tfied to establish the ownership. It is also stated that the survey conducted in 1950 cannot be relied on as it was on the basis of information furnished by Patwari and concerned local persons in the absence of Military Estate Officer. Thus, the Plaintiff tried to establish that the records prepared by the revenue authorities have no evidentiary value and that General Land Register has to prevail over the revenue records. When the Defendant tried to interfere with the land, the suit was filed for appropriate relief.