CHITUMALLA VEERAMALLAIAH Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR,KARIMNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, respondent No. 4 and the father of respondent No. 5 are brothers. The petitioner states that he purchased land, admeasuring Ac. 3.03 guntas in Survey No. 949/1 (first bit) and Ac. 3.29 guntas in Survey No. 950/1 (second bit) of Chigurumamidi Village and Mandal, Karimnagar District under an unregistered document, dated 06.03.1950. It is also stated that an extent of Ac. 1.30 guntas in the first bit and Ac. 1.00 guntas in the second bit were gifted by him to his brother i.e., 4th respondent, through a registered document in the year 2004. It is the case of the petitioner that the remaining property is under his exclusive ownership and enjoyment. It is stated that the 5th respondent filed an application on 27.09.2007 before the Tahsildar, Chigurumamidi Mandal, 3rd respondent herein stating that his father was entitled to 1/3rd share in the two bits referred to above and that his name be entered in the revenue records against the corresponding extents in the two bits. The 3rd respondent is said to have referred the matter to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Karimnagar, 2nd respondent herein and the latter in turn passed order, dated 05.09.2011 directing that the name of the 5th respondent be entered in the revenue records to the extent of 1/3rd in the two bits.

(2.) The petitioner filed a revision under Section 9 of A.P. Rights in Land and Pattedar Pass Books Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act') before the Joint Collector, Karimnagar, 1st respondent herein. The revision was dismissed, through order, dated 12.03.2012. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner contends that he was issued pattadar pass books and title deeds showing the entire extent in the two bits, excluding the one that was gifted and that there was no justification for the 2nd respondent in issuing directions in favour of the 5th respondent, much less for the 1st respondent in dismissing the revision. He contended that if the 5th respondent wants to claim any share, he has to file a suit for partition and no adjudication of rights can take place in the proceedings that are initiated under the Act.