Krishna Reddy & Ors Vs. M. Bagi Reddy & ANR  INSC 861 (8 May 2008)
TARUN CHATTERJEE & HARJIT SINGH BEDI
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL Nos.4384-4385 OF 2002 T. Krishna Reddy & Ors. ......Appellants
M. Bagi Reddy & Anr. .......Respondents
HARJIT SINGH BEDI,J.
1. These appeals arise out of the following facts.
2. The appellant and his predecessors-in-interest were cultivating the suit
land to the extent of about 9.2 acres falling under survey No. 357 of Alwal
village, Malkajgiri Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in Andhra Pradesh and an
ownership certificate under section 38E of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area)
Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 had also been issued in their favour.
In 2 1988, the appellants, pursuant to a family partition whereby they had been
put in exclusive possession of the suit land, filed an application before the
Divisional Revenue Officer for the issuance of a revised ownership certificate
under Section 38E and after due enquiry a revised ownership certificate was, in
fact, issued. The respondents herein challenged the issuance of the aforesaid
revised certificate before the Joint Collector, who dismissed the appeal by his
order dated 19th June 1995 and a petition against this said order was dismissed
by the High Court and the second appeal filed by the respondents against the
order of the Joint Collector was also dismissed on 6th April 2000. The
respondents, who are in possession of the adjoining lands being survey Nos.355
and 405, filed a civil suit on 8th April 1996 before the Subordinate Judge
Court, Ranga Reddy District seeking permanent injunction against the appellants
with respect to the suit land i.e.
the land in Survey No.357. The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the
respondents herein. Aggrieved by 3 the order of the trial court, the present
appellants filed an appeal and the appellate court re-appreciated the evidence
and keeping in view the fact that a certificate under section 38E had been issued
to the appellants which showed that they were in possession of the land,
allowed the appeal. The respondents herein carried the matter in second appeal
to the High Court and also filed a petition against the order dated 19th June
1995 passed by the Joint Collector confirming the validity of the certificate
granted under section 38E. The High Court dismissed the petition challenging
the order dated 19th June 1995 but without framing any substantial question of
law, allowed the second appeal filed against the order of the Civil Court. It
is in this circumstance that the present matter is before us.
3. During the course of hearing, it has been pointed out by the learned
counsel for the appellants that writ proceedings under the Inams Abolition Act
are pending in the High Court and as the outcome of the aforesaid proceedings
would have an important bearing on the 4 present matter as well, it would,
perhaps, be prudent to remit this matter to the High Court to be heard along
with the writ petition. It has been pointed out that in the last paragraph of
the impugned judgment of the High Court, the relevance of the Inam proceedings
then pending before the competent authority has been recognized by the High
Court, and an observation made that they would determine the fate of the
dispute. We accordingly allow these appeals, set aside the order of the High
Court and direct that this matter be heard along with Writ Petition No.17605 of
2003 pending in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. We clarify that nothing in this
order be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.
4. The appeals are allowed accordingly.
(TARUN CHATTERJEE) .................................J.
Pages: 1 2 3