Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kummaridhanunjay Kumar And Others vs The State Of Ap And Others on 6 August, 2024
Author: R. Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010419602023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3488]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 22177/2023
Between:
KummariDhanunjay Kumar and Others ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. PITHANI CHANDRA SEKHARA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. S. LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY (SC FOR APSLSA)
3. MOHAMMED GAYASUDDIN
The Court made the following order:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
There is a waqf institution known as DargahHazarath Syed Shah
IshaqSanaullahQuadrisituated atRozaStreet, Kurnool. The Muthawalis of this
waqf institution are said to have initiated O.S.No.134 of 2005 against Smt.
Kubra Bee and Sri Anandam for ejecting them from Ac.19.65 cents of land
2
situatedin Sy.No.218,Kalluri Village & Mandal, Kurnool District on the ground
that the said property belongs to the waqf institution.
2. This suit was decreed by judgment/decree dated 18.12.2009.
Thereafter, E.P.No.1365 of 2018 was filed before the Principal District Judge,
Kurnool, for execution of the said judgment/decree as the defendants in the
suit were not vacating the suit schedule property.
3. It appears that the original defendants had passed away during
the pendency of the execution petition and theirLRs were brought on record
as judgment debtors 3 to 11 in the execution petition. After some contest, all
the parties are said to have arrived at an understanding which was referred to
the Lok-Adalat. Thereafter, the Lok-Adalat bench at Kurnool, had taken up this
matteras L.A.C.No.03 of 2023 and passed an award dated 11.02.2023, in
accordance with the terms of the compromise executed between the
plaintiffs/decree holders and the Judgment debtors.
4. The terms of the settlement were that the 2ndMuthawali/ 2nd
decree holder was to be given of Ac.26.18 cents of land at Parumanchula
Village of JapaduBungla Mandal.In exchange, the legal heirs of Smt. Kubra
Bee were to be given of A.c.13.10 cents out the Ac.19.65 cents which was the
subject matter of the suit. It appears that it was also agreed that the said land
was to be handed over to the purchaser of this land, from the legal heirs of the
1st respondent, namely the petitioners in the present Writ Petition. The terms
of the compromise also required the parties to executethe registered deeds of
3
exchange in terms of the agreement of exchange dated 28.12.2021 executed
between the parties.
5. The petitioners, being the persons whohad purchased the interest
of the legal heirs of Smt. Kubra Bee, in the aforesaid land, havenow
approached this Court with the contention that the necessary deed of
exchange has not been executed on account of objections being raised by the
2nd respondent herein. The petitioners contend that the said award of the Lok-
Adalat has to be implemented and the respondents, cannot nowgo beyond
and behind the decree of the Waqf Tribunal and the award passed by the Lok-
Adalat.
6. Sri Mohammed Gayasuddin, learned counsel for the Waqf Board,
which is arrayed as respondents 2 & 3, in the Writ Petition contends that the
compromise said to have been enteredbetween twosets of private parties,
over a waqf property, is not valid and no awardcould have been passed on
that basis. He further contends that such an award, which is passed in
violation of the Section 51(A) of the Waqf Act, 1995 is a nullity and cannot be
giveneffect.
7. Section 21 of the Legal Service Authorities Act, 1987 stipulates
that every award passed by a Lok-Adalat should be treated as a decree of
aCivil Court. In such circumstances, the award can only be implemented by
filing an execution petition. No case is made out for such an application to be
moved before this Court under the Article-226 of the Constitution of India.
4
8. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is dismissed leaving it
open to the petitioners to approach the appropriate Civil Court.However, the
Waqf board shall bemade a party to any suchexecution petition filed and it
would be open to the Waqf board to raise all objectionsagainstimplementation
or execution of the said decree. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
________________________
R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.
________________
HARINATH.N, J.
BSM
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION No.22177 OF 2023
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Date: 06.08.2024
BSM
