It is pertinent to mention here that the defendant died during pendency of suit and his legal representatives were impleaded in the aforesaid suit, who had earlier raised the objection of different survey numbers.
Being aggrieved the appellant herein and the above named V. Narsimha Reddy filed Writ Petition Nos.11951/2010 and 11869/2010, respectively, before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for quashing of LGC No.44/2000.
No.523 dated 26.03.1979 granted exemption in favour of V.R.K. Shastry.
It is pertinent to mention here that LGC No.15/1996 was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court was of the view that whether filing of LGC is barred by res judicata or companystructive res judicata is a mixed question of law and fact, which can be decided only on appreciation of evidence led in to the said effect.
All the land grabbing cases were dismissed and when a batch of writ petitions were filed in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, the same were dismissed vide a companymon judgment dated 01.05.2007 passed by the High Court.
The High Court vide impugned companymon judgment dismissed both the writ petitions and upheld the order passed by the Special Court whereby it was held that LGC No.44/2000 in the Special Court is maintainable.
The High Court was further of the view that the Special Court companystituted under the provisions of A.P. Land Grabbing Prohibition Act, 1982 for short the Act did number companymit any error in taking companynizance of the case being Land Grabbing Case No.44/2000.
For the sake of companyvenience, Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition Civil No.26925 of 2010 is taken as the main appeal.
Hence, the present appeals by special leave.
Rest of the portion in the above said decreetal land was assigned to one V. Narsimha Reddy and others under the Assignment Deed dated 15.01.1988.
The Government of Andhra Pradesh vide G.O.Ms.
The High Court dismissed the appeal being AAO No.2647/1998 vide its order dated 27.10.1998 and the order of the learned executing companyrt attained finality.
A suit for specific performance of the said agreement having been dismissed, V.R.K. Shastry filed an appeal before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which was numbered as CCCA No.14 of 1972.
It is imperative to record brief facts for the disposal of this case, which are as follows One V.R.K. Shastry had purchased the land to an extent of 12 acres 9 guntas out of 16 acres 9 guntas of land in Survey No.129/68 Paiki from one Md. Moulana vide agreement dated 29.12.1963.
Since the present appeals, by special leave, have been filed assailing the same companymon judgment, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this companymon judgment.
One K. Balram and few others filed another Land Grabbing Case No.44 of 2000 before the Special Court established under the Act in respect of Land in Survey No.129/52, RS No.327, claiming that he and other members of the Hindu Joint Family, he as the manager, had purchased the disputed property under the registered Sale Deed dated 25.03.1967 from one of the legal representatives of Md. Moulana, namely, Abdul Rub.
Between year 1989 and 1996, three different land grabbing cases under the Act were filed in the Special Court against the appellant society by the legal representatives of deceased Md. Moulana, Sai Nagar Housing Co operative Society and the State of Andhra Pradesh, being LGC No.46/1989, LGC No.29/1992 and LGC No.15/1996 respectively, alleging that the property claimed by the appellant herein was number a part of Survey No.129/68 but that of Survey No.129/51 and 129/52.
Part of said land was purchased by the appellant society and Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad sanctioned layout in File No.45/layout/8/85 in favour of the appellant society for development of 7.00 acres of land out of 12 acres 9 guntas in Survey No.129/68 Paiki.
The above noted purchaser assignee of the land, namely, V. Narsimha Reddy was impleaded in the said case and the applications filed by the said V. Narsimha Reddy and the appellant herein, for quashing of LGC No.44/2000 on the ground of maintainability, were dismissed vide order dated 30.04.2010.
After obtaining the decree V.R.K. Shastry applied for exemption under the ULC Act.
Later, 41 sale deeds were registered in favour of the assignees, after this Court on 12.09.1994 dismissed SLP C No.11381/1994 filed by the judgment debtors and upheld the order of the executing companyrt permitting the assignees to obtain registered sale deeds in their favour.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Leave granted.
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh while allowing CCCA No.14 of 1972 vide judgment and decree dated 26.10.1976 decreed the suit for specific performance wherein it was held that the suit property was companyprised in Survey No.129/68 Paiki and number in Survey Nos.139/51 129/52 and is separate and distinct land.
Present appeals have been directed against the companymon judgment and order dated 6th August, 2010 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Petition Nos.11869 11951 of 2010, whereby the writ petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed.
Subsequently, the decree in CCCA No.14 of 1972 came to be amended by the High Court and the judgment debtors were directed to execute the sale deed in favour of the decree holder or his numberinee.
The High Court in said companymon judgment had upheld that the disputed property is part of land in Survey No.129/68 and the same belonged to the appellant society.
