THORATI LATCHARAO Vs. MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff in O. S. No. 395 of 1990 on the file of the learned IV additional District Munsif Judge, Rajahmundry is the appellant. He filed the suit against the respondents, for the relief of declaration that he is the cultivating tenant in respect of the suit schedule property and for consequential perpetual injunction restraining them and their agents from dispossessing him. He pleaded that the land admeasuring ac. 2. 41 cents in R. S. No. 574/1 of Kadiam Village, East Godavari district was owned by one Ramella Timmarayanam and that he is the tenant of that land for about 30 years, prior to the filing of the suit. He further pleaded that without his knowledge and notice to him, the respondents had identified that land for surrender, as excess land under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (for short 'the Ceiling Act'), and that on the strength of the same, the respondents tried to evict him.

(2.) THE respondents denied the claim of the appellant. According to them, the land was surrendered by the owner and there were no tenancy rights over it. They pleaded that the surrender became final and possession was also taken on 13-10-1989. It was alleged that the land was proposed to be assigned to as many as eight beneficiaries and that the value of the land was also remitted by the beneficiaries to the Government.

(3.) THROUGH its judgment, dated 21-8-1997, the trial Court decreed the suit. Aggrieved thereby, the respondents filed A. S. No. 182 of 1997 in the Court of the learned District Judge, Rajahmundry. The lower appellate Court allowed the appeal through its judgment, dated 22-122000. Hence, this second appeal.