JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)This civil revision petition is
filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India against the concurrent judgments
rendered in A.T.C. No.46 of 2002 on the
file of the Special Officer-cum-Principal
Junior Civil Judge, Kothapet, and A.T.A.
No. 14 of 2004 on the file of the Appellate
Authority-cum-District Judge, East Godavari,
Rajahmundry.
(2.)The petitioner filed A.T.C. No.46
of 2002 under Section 16 of the Andhra
Pradesh (Andhra Area) Tenancy Act (for
short 'the Act') for the relief of declaration
that he is a statutory tenant and that he
cannot be evicted otherwise than through
the procedure prescribed by law. According
to him, his father late Suryanarayanaraju
was the tenant of 0-40 cents of schedule
property from the year 1955 and after his
death he continued as tenant. He alleged
that the land was leased out to them by
the members of Dandu family of their
village and that in a suit for partition
between Dandu family on the one hand and
the respondents herein on the other hand,
the suit schedule land was allotted to the
share of the respondents. It is alleged that
in the final decree proceedings, the
Commissioner appointed by the Court tried
to deliver possession of the suit schedule
land to the respondents and at that time
the petitioner raised an objection stating that
he is the tenant of the land.
(3.)The respondents resisted the A.T.C.
They pleaded that the petition schedule
property is one of the items in O.S. No.298
of 1971 filed by them for partition against
Dandu family and after the preliminary
decree became final, steps were taken
in the final decree proceedings. It was
alleged that the schedule property was
allotted to their share and when it was
about to be delivered, the Dandu people, the
defendants in O.S. No.298 of 1971, have
set up the petitioner to deprive them of the
fruits of the decree.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.