SHAJADI BEGUM Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR MEDAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition is filed under Section 91 of A.P. (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short 'the Act') by the respondents 2 to 5 before the lower appellate authority, aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Joint Collector, Medak at Sangareddy dated 12-8-2004, under which the appeal filed by the respondents 3 to 5 herein against the orders of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Toopran, dated 2-6-2003, was allowed.

(2.) Respondents 3 to 5 herein filed an application before the Mandal Revenue Officer, Toopran under Section 40 of the Act, seeking to substitute their names as legal heirs of the original protected tenants in respect of Sy.Nos.742 and 743 in an extent of Ac. 10.32 gts. and 19.30 gts. respectively, situated in Toopran Village and Mandal of Medak District. It was their case that the father of the 3rd respondent herein one Jangam Muthaiah was the protected tenant in respect of the above lands. After his death, the 3rd respondent, who is his son and respondents 4 and 5 who are his grand-sons (sons of 3rd respondent) are entitled to get their names entered as legal heirs and successors. It was also stated that either Muthaiah, the father of the 3rd respondent or the respondents 3 to 5 have ever surrendered the tenancy rights in respect of the above lands to the pattadar, therefore, they are entitled to get their names entered, by recognizing them as successors, and therefore, the application.

(3.) In the said application, notice was given to the 1st petitioner Smt. Shajadi Begum, who is the wife of Md. Nazer Ali, who is the original pattadar of the land, and thereafter, the matter was heard by the Mandal Revenue Officer. The Mandal Revenue Officer referred to the earlier proceedings that had taken place before the then District Revenue Officer, Medak at Sangareedy, dated 3-10-1978 in Case No.C3/l 1625/1977, which was filed by the pattadar for recovery of rents against the tenants (3rd respondent and his two brothers), where a compromise memo was filed between the pattadar and the protected tenants and the matter was compromised. As per which, the landowner and pattadar agreed to give the land in an extent of Ac. 19.30 gts. in Sy.No.743 to the tenants with absolute rights, while the tenants have agreed to give up their rights in favour of the landowner in respect of an extent of Ac. 10.32 in Sy.No.742. In fact, pursuant to the said compromise, the tenants have obtained registered documents in Document Nos. 154/80, 155/80, 156/80 and 157/80 in favour of the three sons and the wife of one of the sons of late Jangam Muthaiah, the original protected tenant. Therefore, it was felt by the Mandal Revenue Officer that in view of the said compromise and settlement of the rights between the parties, which was recorded by the authority under the provisions of the Act, the present application is not maintainable. Therefore, an endorsement was made to that effect by the Mandal Revenue Officer, Toopran.