SHAIK NABI Vs. N PARIJATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 91 of the A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioners-herein were the respondents in Case No.B/23892/82, on the file of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The respondents-herein are the legal representatives of one N. Krishna Reddy, who was the petitioner in Case No.B/23892/1982 before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Late Krishna Reddy filed the above-said petition before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Malkajgiri Mandal, under Sec.40 of the Act for granting succession certificate of protected tenancy and also under Section32 of the Act for delivery of possession of the land after evicting the respondents therein (petitioners-herein).

(2.) The facts, as disclosed from the petition filed by Krishna Reddy before the Mandal Revenue Officer, are as follows: One L. Ella Reddy and His brother Narsa Reddy were the protected-tenants under the Inamdar, who was the predecessor-in-title of the petitioners herein, with respect to the suit schedule land. After the death of Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy, taking advantage of the minority of Krishna Reddy and others, they were dispossessed by the petitioners-herein. It is significant to note that the date of dispossession has not been stated in the said application. During the pendency of the said petition before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Krishna Reddy died and his legal representatives were brought on record, who are the respondents-herein. Krishna Reddy is the son of Narsa Reddy. Though Ella Reddy has got sons, they were not impleaded as party-petitioners in that petition.

(3.) That petition was opposed by the Inamdars (the petitioners-herein), alleging that Yella Reddy and Narsa Reddy died after they were evicted by the Tahsildar on 10-8-1962, in the Execution Proceedings, viz., E.2/4603/60, taken pursuant to the termination of their tenancy rights by the Inamdar. This execution proceeding was filed for implementing the order of eviction passed by the Tahsildar on20-7-1959,inEviction PetitionNo.A.5/1082/58,filed by the Inamdar, under Sections 28 and 32(2) of the Act, against Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy. As the default in payment of rents committed by the protected-tenants was for less than three years, the Tahsildar granted 90 days' time for payment of the entire arrears of rent due, with a default clause for eviction. Against the order of eviction passed by the Tahsildar, the tenants Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy filed an appeal before the Joint Collector, Hyderabad, which was numbered as File No.B.7/32883/59. The said appeal was dismissed on 7-12-1959. Against that order, even though revision lies under Section 91 of the Act, the same was not filed. Therefore, the order of eviction passed by the Tahsildar had become final. As Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy failed to comply with the conditional order passed by the Tahsildar, the Inamdar filed E.P. No.E.2/4603/60, before the Tahsildar, East Taluk, Hyderabad. Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy filed a petition bearing No.A-3/4650/59, before the Deputy Tahsildar, Eastern Division, Hyderabad District, for fixation of fair lease amount under Section 11 and Sec. 17 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, regarding the very same lands, but they did not succeed in the said petition. On account of pendency of this fixation of fair rent application, filed by Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy, referred to above, the E.P. filed by the Inamdar was kept pending and ultimately an order was passed on ,10-8-1962 for eviction of Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy. The extent of the land covered by these proceedings is Ac.25-27 guntas of land. The notice of termination, given by the Inamdar in the year 1955 to Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy, also relates to Ac.25-27 guntas of land. The same extent is also the subject-matter of the eviction petition. The protected tenants, Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy, were not able to pay the amount. So a compromise petition was filed duly signed by the Inamdar and the tenants as well as the respective Counsel appearing for them, which was recorded by the Tahsildar, in the E.P. pending before him. The Tahsildar issued warrant for delivery of possession of the land pursuant to the order passed in the Eviction Pretitinon on 10-8-1962 and possession of the land was, in fact, delivered to the Inamdar, under a panchnama. Therefore, it is contended by the Inamdars, the petitioners-herein, that the protected-tenancy of Ella Reddy and Narsa Reddy was terminated under due process of law, in the year 1959 itself, and hence the present application filed by Krishna Reddy under Sections 40 and 32 of the Act is not maintainable as the right of protected-tenancy did not devolve to him.