This writ appeal challenged the dismissal of an application to implead an appellant claiming adverse possession in a writ petition under the A.P. Land Encroachment Act. The High Court held title issues are outside the scope of a W.P. Note date.
Application for impleadment dismissed; Writ Appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH &
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY
WRIT APPEAL No.1448 of 2008
(Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/06/2008 in WP NO : 21663 OF 1998 on the file of the High Court.)
Between:
Mohd. Mustaffudin Khan S/o. Late Mohd. Ghouseuddin Khan 2. Aziz Khan R/o. 8-2-326/1, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.
..... APPELLANT
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Appellant:MR.V.ESWARAIAH CHOWDARY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.V.RAVI KIRAN RAO The Court made the following:
Form-NIC-OGS/WA {KBJ}
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY
WRIT APPEAL No.1448 of 2008
JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah)
The application filed by the appellant herein in WPMP.No.5937 of 2008 in W.P.21663 of 1998 seeking for his impleadment as respondent No.4 in the writ petition filed by the respondents 1 to 8 herein against the official respondents 9 to 11 herein was dismissed by order dated 17.06.2008. Aggrieved by the same, this writ appeal has been filed. The respondents 1 to 8 herein filed the writ petition questioning the common notices dated 27.07.1998 issued by the 11th respondent herein under Sec.7 of A.P.Land Encroachment Act. The case of the writ petitioners is that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property in question since 50 years and they have acquired title by adverse possession, and after 50 years of their possession and enjoyment, the proceedings have been initiated under A.P.Land Encroachment Act. But, it is the case of the Government that the land in question belongs to the Government and the writ petitioners
are only encroachers.
We are of the opinion that the scope of the writ petition is only as to whether issuance of notice under Sec.7 of Land Encroachment Act is illegal or not. The petitioner herein is claiming independent right and title. If that be so, that issue cannot at all be decided in the pending writ petition. The respondents/writ petitioners cannot get any relief in the writ petition. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the learned single Judge has rightly dismissed the application of the petitioner herein, keeping it open to work out his appropriate remedies, establishing his right and title over the property in question.
The Writ Appeal is, therefore, dismissed. Consequently, the WAMP.2817/2008 is also dismissed.
____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J
________________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J
Dated: 05.11.2008 Dsr
........REGISTRAR
To
Musheerabad Mandal, Hyderabad Dist.
4. 2 CD copies
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging notices under Sec.7 of the Land Encroachment Act can decide the issue of independent title and adverse possession raised by an impleaded appellant.
Whether the scope of the writ petition regarding the legality of the notice allows for adjudication of the appellant's claim of title.
Whether the dismissal of the appellant's application for impleadment was correct.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Mustaffudin Khan S/o. Late Mohd. Ghouseuddin Khan
Y. Ganna Reddy S/o. Late Malla Reddy
E. Narasimha Reddy S/o. Late Bala Krishna Reddy
E. Ram Reddy S/o. Late Bala Krishna Reddy
Y. Pratap Reddy S/o. Ganne Reddy
The District Collector Hyderabad Dist.
V.ESWARAIAH
G.V.SEETHAPATHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
