suit for permanent injunction. Interim injunction made absolute pending appeal Cancellation of pattadar pass book and title deed - not valid - res-subjudice = PETITIONER RESPONDENT RASOOL SAB & 8 OTHERS VS MOULA SAB - hc.ap.nic.in/csis/MainInfo.=CRP&mno=2208&year=2013
suit for permanent injunction. Interim injunction made absolute pending appeal
Cancellation of pattadar pass book and title deed - not valid - res-subjudice=
since the issue is subjudice, no decision on the cancellation of the pattadar passbooks and title deeds can be taken by the revenue authorities =
during the pendency of the appeal before the lower appellate Court, his clients have produced the letter dated 19.07.2012 addressed by the Tahsildar, Adoni, to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, for cancellation of pattadar passbooks and title deeds granted in favour of the respondent and that the same was marked as Ex.R-34.
The Courts below rendered findings in favour of the respondent based on the documentary evidence. Therefore, while exercising revisional jurisdiction of this Court, I am not inclined to disturb these findings of fact as they do not suffer from any patent errors.
| CRP 2208 / 2013 | CRPSR 12647 / 2013 |
|
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2208 of 2013
Date: 11.06.2013
Between:
Rasool Sab and others
.. Petitioners
and
Moula Sab
.. Respondent
Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri K.Laxmaiah
Counsel for Respondent : Sri K.Sitaram
ORDER:
This civil revision petition arises out of the order dated 16.04.2013 in C.M.A.No.22 of 2012 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge, Kurnool, whereby he has confirmed the order dated 07.06.2012 in I.A.No.600 of 2010 in O.S.No.153 of 2010 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Adoni.
The respondent filed the aforementioned suit for permanent injunction.
He has also filed the aforementioned I.A. for temporary injunction against the petitioners.
An ad interim injunction was initially granted and later the same was made absolute by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, through its order dated 07.06.2012 in the aforesaid I.A.
While passing the said order, the trial Court has placed reliance on
Exs.P-1 to P-4, which are the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Adoni, pattadar passbook, title deed and No.3 adangal extract for fasli 1419.
Exs.P-1 to P-4, which are the proceedings of the Mandal Revenue Officer, Adoni, pattadar passbook, title deed and No.3 adangal extract for fasli 1419.
The petitioners also produced documentary evidence, which are marked as Exs.R-1 to R-33. After considering the evidence on both sides, the trial Court has come to the conclusion that the respondent is in possession of the suit schedule property as on the date of filing of the suit.
The lower appellate Court has confirmed the same through its order dated 16.04.2013, which is questioned in this revision.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the pendency of the appeal before the lower appellate Court, his clients have produced the letter dated 19.07.2012 addressed by the Tahsildar, Adoni, to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoni, for cancellation of pattadar passbooks and title deeds granted in favour of the respondent and that the same was marked as Ex.R-34.
A perusal of the order of the lower appellate Court shows that it has discussed the aforesaid document and also referred to Ex.P-6 filed by the respondent i.e., letter dated 05.01.2013 of the Revenue Divisional Officer issued in reply to Ex.R-34 to the effect that since the issue is subjudice, no decision on the cancellation of the pattadar passbooks and title deeds can be taken.
The Courts below rendered findings in favour of the respondent based on the documentary evidence. Therefore, while exercising revisional jurisdiction of this Court, I am not inclined to disturb these findings of fact as they do not suffer from any patent errors.
For the aforementioned reasons, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
As a sequel to dismissal of the civil revision petition, C.R.P.M.P.No.2903 of 2013 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.
_____________________
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
11th June, 2013
GHN
Comments
Post a Comment