RAMACHANDRASWAMI VARU OF UTTARADI MUTT SAMASTHANAM Vs. NAGOBOYINA KOTESWARA RAO
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
RAMACHANDRASWAMI VARU OF UTTARADI MUTT SAMASTHANAM
NAGOBOYINA KOTESWARA RAO
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) In this Revision Petition a short question arises as to the interpretation of Section 13 of the Andhra Pradesh ( Andhra Area ) Inams ( Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari ) Act of 1956 ( Act 37 of 1956 ) ( hereinafter called the Act ) and Rule 15 of the rules framed thereunder.
(2.) The question arises on the following facts : The Tahsildar, Tenali, issued a notice under Rule 3 of the rules stating that he proposed suo moto to hold an enquiry under Section 3 of the Act for the purpose of determining whether the land in T. D. No. 904 in Devarapalli Agraharam, Tenali Taluk, Guntur District, is an inam land, and if so, whether such inam land is in a ryotwari or Zamindari or inam village, and whether such inam land is held by any institution, and called upon all persons and institutions claiming interest in the said lands to file before him statements of particulars within 15 days from the date of the publication of the notice. Pursuant to the aforesaid Notification, the petition herein Sree Ramachandra Swami Varu of Uttaradi Mutt, Samasthanam, represented by the Head and Trustee Sree Satya Pramoda Thirtha Swamulu Varu, represented by his power-of-attorney Agent Sri Markapuram Sreenivasa Charyulu, filed a statement stating that the said lands are inam lands situated in an inam village and held by the institution viz., Uttaradi Mutt. He filed another application under Section 7 of the Act for the grant of a ryotwari patta in favour of the said Mutt. About 105 persons who were shown as petitioners Nos. 2 to 106 before the Tahsildar, filed written statements claiming that the lands covered by the notices are inam lands situated in an inam village, but not held by any institution and that they are held by an individual viz., the Deity Sree Ramachandra Swami Varu of Uttaradi Mutt. The Tahsildar, Tenali, in R. C. No. 1692/1969 dated 25-8-1970 passed an order holding that the lands in question are inam lands, that they are situated in an inam village viz., Devarpally Agraharam, and that the lands are not held by any Institution.
(3.) The Uttaradi Mutt represented by its power-of-attorney Agent preferred an appeal against the said order of the Tahsildar, before the Revenue Divisional Officer Tenali. Along with the said appeal, the Mutt filed an application praying that the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 alone should be allowed to represent the petitioners 2 to 106 shown as petitioners in the enquiry in R. C. No. 1692/69 before the Tahsildar, Tenali on the ground that the petitioners 2 to 106 are numerically large and that their contentions is the same.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.