Allada Narayana Reddy vs The Joint Collector, Ranga Reddy ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4507 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                      AND
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


                  WRIT APPEAL No.975 of 2008

JUDGMENT:   (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)




     The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated

14.08.2007

passed in W.P.No.16519 of 2007 by the learned

Single Judge.

The facts of the case reveal that a writ petition was

preferred by the writ petitioners, who are the appellants in

the present case, stating that they are the owners of land

admeasuring Ac.20.16 guntas in Sy.No.109 situated at

Chevella Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It was

stated by them that the land originally belonged to Allada

Pochamma, mother of petitioner No.1 and late Allada Linga

Reddy. It was further pleaded by them that one Takulapally

Narasimlu in collusion with the village Patwari fraudulently

got entered his name in the village records for the years 1954-

1955 to 2004-2005 showing himself as owner of the land and

they came to know about such entries later on. Petitioner

No.3 has approached the Mandal Revenue Officer and the

Mandal Revenue Officer issued a memo on 13.02.2007

informing petitioner No.3/Allada Narasimha Reddy that the

protected tenancy register and khasra pahanis were torn and

therefore, certified copies cannot be issued. There was a

serious dispute between the parties in respect of title and the

learned Single Judge, as correction of 40 years old entries

was sought, arrived at a conclusion that the parties should

take recourse to the civil proceedings i.e., to file a civil suit.

In the considered opinion of this Court, in case of

disputed questions of fact and when a party claims title and

possession of the land, the proper course of action is certainly

a civil suit and not a writ petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge was justified

in permitting the parties to take recourse to the civil

proceedings. This Court does not find any reason to interfere

with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

______________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 20.12.2021 ES