Appellant claims that it was a joint family property.
Mr. G. Hanumanth Rao, learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would companytend The Special Court and companysequently the High Court companymitted a serious error in passing the impugned judgment insofar as they failed to take into companysideration that the Special Court had the jurisdiction to go into the question of title by and between the parties.
Respondents companytend that Ram Katin Singh was the exclusive owner of the property and transferred his right, title and interest in favour of the respondent No.
Aggrieved thereby and dissatisfied therewith, the appellant filed a writ application before the High Court of Judicature at Andhra Pradesh, which by reason of the impugned judgment dated 13.12.2007 has been dismissed.
Appellant filed an application before the Special Court companystituted under the Act on or about 16.02.2002.
Respondents denied and disputed that the transactions entered into by and between Ram Katin Singh and the respondent No.
1 herein by reason of the aforementioned deeds of sale.
1, on the one hand, and the latter and the respondent Nos.
It arises out of the following factual matrix.
Appellant having pleaded the factum of land grabbing in the companycise statement annexed to the application, it was obligatory on the part of the Special Court to determine the said issue.
Appellant indisputably is a resident of Uttar Pradesh.
It was marked as L.G.C. SR No.
Respondent No.
There exists a dispute as regards date of death of Ram Katin Singh.
Whereas, according to the appellant, he died issueless on 22.02.1978, the respondents companytend that he expired in 1992.
442 of 2002.
Respondents allegedly taking advantage of the death of Ram Katin Singh fabricated three fraudulent sale deeds dated 4.03.1980, 6.03.1980 and 17.03.1981 impersonating the said Ram Katin Singh.
Application of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 1982 for short the Act is involved in this appeal.
1, in turn, transferred his right, title and interest by executing deeds of sale in favour of several persons.
The suit land is fallow.
The Special Court by reason of an order dated 4.11.2003 dismissed the said application opining that the only question as to whether Ram Katin Singh was alive on the date of execution of the said deeds of sale in the year 1980, by itself, cannot be determined as foundational fact necessary for initiating a proceeding before it in absence of requisite pleadings.
2 to 6, on the other, were bogus, sham or illegal transactions as alleged or at all.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
One Ram Katin Singh was the owner of a land measuring 16 acres, 30 guntas situate in Feerzadiguda Village, Ranga Reddy District in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
