N.M AZIZUDDIN KHAN Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30. 03.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.No.7668 of 2021 filed by the appellant/writ petitioner seeking the following relief:

(2.) The said writ petition has been dismissed by the impugned order on two counts. Firstly, the claim of the petitioner itself is stale, as he has not taken any legal recourse in respect of his grievance for a period spreading over four decades and nor is there any averment in the writ petition to the effect that the petitioner took any steps to protect the subject property over this duration. In fact, the writ petitioner seeks setting aside of a sale transaction conducted about 40 years ago, in the year 1979. Secondly, it has been observed that assuming that the writ petitioner overcomes the hurdle of explaining the inordinate delay, it is apparent from the petition that he has raised disputed questions of fact and under the garb of filing the writ petition, seeking a declaration to the effect that the sale documents registered in respect of the subject premises on 14.05.1979 are invalid, on the plea that the vendor never possessed the title for passing on the same to the vendee. Noting that all the said averments would require the court to examine the claim of ownership, the manner in which the sale transaction had taken place in the year 1979 and would require evidence to be brought on record, the court has declined to exercise its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) At the outset, we have requested learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner to point out the documents placed on record showing any correspondence made by his client with the respondent authorities in respect of the subject registered sale deed from the year 1979, till the date of filing of the writ petition i.e., 28.04.2021. Learned counsel concedes that there has been no correspondence exchanged between the appellant and the respondents over the past 40 years in respect of the title of the subject land. He however asserts that the appellant was unaware of the very existence of the subject sale deed till March, 2021 when he obtained a certified copy of the said document. All kinds of untenable excuses are sought to be offered to explain the inaction on the part of the appellant in seeking appropriate and timely legal recourse and none of the explanations are based on any legal submission.