KOMMINENI NARENDRA Vs. RAVELA RAMA MOHANA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant No.6 in the suit filed the above civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against common order, dtd. 27/4/2022 in I.A.Nos.542 and 543 of 2021 in O.S.No.59 of 2021 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Mangalagiri.

(2.) Respondent Nos.1 and 2 being plaintiffs filed O.S.No.59 of 2021 against revision petitioner and others for declaration of title over 'A' schedule property shown as ABCD in the plaint plan as private property of the plaintiffs over which they are having absolute right, title interest and possession and for consequential relief of recovery of possession of 'B' schedule property shown in between points BB2B3 and A2B3 CD forming part and parcel of the plaint 'A' schedule property free from obstruction by evicting/removing the encroachments of structural constructions made by the defendant therefrom and for permanent injunction, etc.

(3.) In the plaint it was contended inter alia that 'A' schedule property, tiled house and house site, is ancestral property of the plaintiffs; that plaintiffs got the property by way of succession; that decades back, grandfather of plaintiff No.l got constructed tiled roof house in between points AAZ and BB2 of the plaint 'A' schedule site for the purpose of storage of agricultural produce; that persons passing through their village used to take rest on the pails of the said tiled house and the property is located at the main junction and cross roads of the village; that 'A' schedule property is commonly known and called as Ramalingaiah Satram; that in due course, suit schedule property was succeeded by plaintiff No.1 and it is their private property; that the property of defendant No.6 is situated towards South of the suit schedule property and is having access into the Western side, Thulluru to Guntur road; that 'A' schedule property was levied to tax and later by Resolution No.57/69-70, dtd. 31/3/1970, tax was exempted till 1989; that in the revision held in 1989-90, since property is private property, property tax was levied and collected vide assessment No.753; that later in the revision in the year, 1994-95, once again exemption was given and it continued till the year 1999; that from 1999 tax was levied with assessment No.667 and property tax was collected for the schedule property in the name of plaintiff No.1 till 2008 and by that year the assessment number was 620; that the plaintiff got effected modifications in the schedule property and converted the same into shops and leased out to tenants for running businesses; that during the year, 2008 some of the busy bodies in the village made false complaints to the government; that in said connection, in the month of February, 2008 the then Tahsildar, Thulluru issued notice to plaintiff No.1 to submit explanation for which plaintiff No.1 offered his explanation, dtd. 22/2/2008; that Tahsildar dropped further proceedings; that defendant No.6, who has no right, came to the suit schedule property along with mob and caused damage to the articles of shop in 'A' schedule property and also damaged part of tiled roof house and obstructed construction works of the drainage canals started by the APCRDA, in front of the suit 'A' schedule property; that plaintiffs and others objected for the same; that again on 15/11/2018, defendant No.5 along with his staff, without issuing any notice, came to the suit schedule property and with the support of defendant No.6 and some others caused damage to the articles of the shopkeepers in 'A' schedule property; that defendant No.6 illegally encroached the vacant site lying towards South and East from out of the plaint 'A' schedule property; that the encroached property is shown as 'B' schedule property; that plaintiffs as well as shopkeepers lodged complaints against defendant Nos.5 and 6 before SHO, Thulluru Police Station; that defendant No.5 issued notice, dtd. 17/11/2018 to plaintiff No.2 calling upon to produce record of title for the suit 'A' schedule property; that plaintiffs filed W.P.No.43066 of 2018 and defendant No.6 filed W.P.No.43748 of 2018; that both the writ petitions were disposed of; that plaintiffs preferred W.A.No.459 of 2021; that defendant No.5, in violation of orders of the High Court in W.P.No.43066 of 2018, affixed notice, dtd. 16/2/2021 at the plaint 'A' schedule property by mentioning that the High Court decided the property as "Satram Property" and thereby it is the property of Gram Panchayat and therefore, plaintiffs filed the suit for above reliefs.