M/S. NAVYA INFRACON PROJECTS (I) PRIVATE LTD., VISAKHAPATNAM Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An issue which is short but of considerable importance arises for adjudication in this writ petition. What precisely is the scope of enquiry before the District Legal Services Authority in the matter of legal aid exempting from payment of Court fee available under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short, the Act) and the Central and State Rules and Regulations made thereunder is that issue.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the filing of this writ petition are briefly set out hereunder:

(3.) It was further averred that at the time of filing of the suit, the plaintiffs owned an extent of Ac.0.35 cents in Sy. No.10/1, an extent of Ac.0.21 in Sy. No.10/2, an extent of Ac.0.21 in Sy. No.10/3 and an extent of Ac.2.06 cents in Sy. No.18/5. The plaintiffs alleged that while entering into the Registered Sale Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney on 18.07.1997, defendant Nos.1 to 4, taking advantage of the innocence and illiteracy of the plaintiffs, got a recital made in the agreement with an evil intention to the effect that except the property covered by the Registered Sale Agreement, the plaintiffs do not own any other land and that defendant Nos.1 to 4 have brought into existence some sale deeds taking advantage of the Registered Sale Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney executed by the plaintiffs and their family members in their name and also in the name of defendant No.5. That with the aid and assistance of defendant No.6 writ petitioner constructions are being made by encroaching into the schedule mentioned properties highhandedly. The plaintiffs have applied for legal aid by way of exempting from payment of Court fee to the tune of Rs.18,59,104.00. The Secretary of respondent No.3 issued certificate dated 19.02.2016 exempting respondent No.4 (plaintiff No.1) from payment of Court fee of Rs.18,59,104.00. This action of respondent No.3 is questioned in this writ petition by defendant No.6 in the suit.