The State Of Andhra Pradesh,Rep. By ... vs Kothacheruvu Plantations And ... on 17 April, 2014
In D. Rami Reddy v. The Executive Officer, Tirumala
Tirupati Devasthanams , a Division Bench of this Court consisting
of Goda Raghuram and N.Ravishankar JJ has interpreted the decision
in Vatticherukuru Village Panchayat (51 supra) in a like manner.
In that case, a suit was filed for declaration of title to certain property
and for recovery of the same from the Tirumala Tirupathi
Devasthanam. The suit was dismissed and an appeal was filed in the
High Court challenging it. The plaintiffs case was that his father
purchased the subject land from its lawful owner and also obtained
possession of the same on the very same day and that subsequently his
father obtained a ryotwari patta under Act XXXVII of 1956 and
continued in possession and enjoyment of it; that the Tehsildar had
decided that the land was an Inam land covered by Act XXXVII of
1956, and therefore, he is entitled to the said property. The
Devasthanam on the other hand contended that the entire extent of
land had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in 1937
itself much prior to the decision of the Tehsildar under Act XXXVII
of 1956 and since the land had ceased to be Inam land by the date of
commencement of the Act XXXVII of 1956, the patta issued by the
Tehsildar was void and he had no jurisdiction to grant it since the Act
had no application to it. They therefore contended that the Tehsildar
acted totally without jurisdiction in granting the patta to the father of
the plaintiff and it was a nullity. The appellant/plaintiff contended
that the decision of the Tehsildar under the Act had become final and
the Civil Court cannot go into its validity and the so the suit ought to
be decreed.