VADIGA AMOSE Vs. VADIGA ANJANEYULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the impugned Award dated 20.8.2005 passed by the fifth respondent in LAC No. 1049 of 2005 under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, as illegal, void and opposed to Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India, on the ground that respondents 1 to 4 played fraud on the Judiciary by suppressing the joint family members of late Veeraswamy and partition settlement deed dated 31.4.2005. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition, in brief, are as follows. The petitioner's mother by name Emelamma is the legally wedded wife of late Veeraswamy. The petitioner and third respondent are the sons of Emelamma and Veeraswamy. His mother went to her parents' house for second delivery in the year 1976. Taking advantage of the same, Veeraswamy high-handedly married his sister's daughter by name Rama Lakshmi, who is the second respondent herein. Respondents 1 and 4 are the sons of Veeraswamy and Rama Lakshmi. The petitioner and respondents have been residing jointly by enjoying the ancestral property admeasuring Acs.26.17 guntas in Survey No. 425, Acs. 12.27 guntas in Survey No. 427/A, and Acs.13.30 guntas including house bearing No. 3-9-8 with a vacant site of Ac. 1.00 situated at Guddimalla Village (Venkatagiri), Khammam Rural Mandal and District. All the properties are ancestral properties and the parties have equal shares. Venkataswamy died in the year 1999. Respondents 1, 2 and 4 are residing in the village. The petitioner, who is working in Police Department, is being transferred from one place to another place, as part of his job. At the time of filing the writ petition, he is working as Sub-Inspector of Police, Kushaiguda Police Station. The third respondent, who is his natural elder brother, is a Doctor in Kothagudem Town. The petitioner and respondents I to 4 have partitioned their joint family properties in the presence of village elders, as per partition deed dated 13.4.2005. The said document is signed by him and respondents 1 to 4. The petitioner leased out his share to his brothers and they used to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month towards rent till 2011. In the month of May, 2012, his brothers refused to pay the rents on the ground that he has no right in the property.

(2.) The petitioner came to know about filing of a suit and settlement of the same in Lok Adalat. He obtained certified copy of the impugned award dated 20.8.2005 passed by the fifth respondent. The respondents 1 to 4 together colluded and initiated the civil suit by playing fraud against the Court and obtained the impugned award behind his back by suppressing partition deed dated 13.4.2005. The impugned award passed by the fifth respondent is non est in the eye of law and it is liable to be set aside.

(3.) The third respondent filed counter-affidavit on behalf of all the respondents inter alia contending that the petitioner, by suppressing the factum of his birth, pleaded that he is the son of late Veeraswamy as if he was born through him. The petitioner has produced a fabricated and forged deed dated 13.4.2005 for getting an order in this writ petition. The said action is nothing but perjury and plying fraud on this Court and petitioner deserves to be punished for the said offence. The petitioner has no right to claim the property in question, as he has nothing to do with their family. It is absolutely false to state that the petitioner is the son of late Veeraswamy. If the petitioner has any grievance, he has to approach jurisdictional civil Court and he cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The contention that the respondents 1 to 4 have obtained the impugned award by playing fraud on Court is false.