SYED ALI Vs. JAMAL SAHEB KALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of possession of Ac. 6-14 guntas of land in S Nos. 65, 66' 68, 70 and 71 situated in Dharpalli village in Nizamabad taluk. The plaintiffs case is that the suit properties are the service inam lands pertaining to Dargah Chilla Dastagir. They were granted in favour of Syed Ali Shah, the paternal grand-father of the plaintiff through Muntakab. The lands are burdened with service and the plaintiff is performing the service and was in possession and enjoyment of the suit lands till 1950. In 1951, the defendants occupied the suit lands illegally. In view of the extension of the period of limitation till the end of December, 1972, for institution of a suit for recovery of possession of the service inam lands, the suit is not barred by time. The Secretary of the Wakf Board permitted the plaintiff to institute the suit.

(2.) In the written statement filed on behalf of defendants 2 to 4 and 6 to 8, it is stated that the suit lands are not service inam lands. The plaintiff himself in the proceedings before the District Collector and the Revenue Divisional Officer. Nizamabad, stated that he is the pattadar and that he was in possession of these suit lands and the defendants are interfering with his peaceful possession. The claim for mesne profits is not tenable. The plaintiff's suit is barred by limitation. One Syed Ali Bashu, the grand-father of the plaintiff was having possession over the lands and he leased out the lands to the defendants abput 40 years ago and the defendants were paying 1 /4th of the produce towards lease to Syed Ali Bashu. In 1949-50, the heirs of Syed Ali Bashu sold away the rights of possession and enjoyment of the suit lands to the defendants. In the record of rights in 1954-55, the defendants were shown as occupants. The suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. The plaintiff has neither title nor possession. The right to possession as tenants subsists and in any event the defendants have been in continuous possession for more than 12 years adverse to the rights of the plaintiff and the suit is barred by limitation. By virtue of the A P Inams Abolition Act, 1955, all the rights of inamdai in the suit lands are extinguished. The suit lands are neither endowment lands nor wakf property.

(3.) In the re-joinder filed by the plaintiff, it is stated that the patta granted in the name of the plaintiff in respect of the suit lands was subsequently cancelled by the orders of the High Court The defendants clearly admitted in their counter to the petition of the plaintiff before the Revenue Divisional Officer that the Tahsildar was not competent to grant patta. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizambad, directed the plaintiff to approach the civil court for seeking remedy. The alleged lease by Syed Ali Bashu is false The lease of the inam lands and the alleged sale thereof are null and void. The father of the plaintiff was performing the service having possession over the suit lands and after his death, the plaintiff is performing the service. The suit is within time, as the period of limitation has been expended. The service inam is not disturbed despite the provisions of the Inams Abolition Act, 1955.