VELUGUBANTLA NARAYYA Vs. THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
LAWS(APH)-1955-4-19
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on April 04,1955

VELUGUBANTLA NARAYYA Appellant
VERSUS
The Provincial Government Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

KALIANNA MUDALI V. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA IN COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
THE SECRETARY OF STATE V. RAGHAVACHARIAR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

UMAMAHESWARAM,J. - (1.)The plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit against the Provincial Government, Madras, represented by Collector, East Godavari, for a declaration that the land or site of the proposed channel belonged to him and for an injunction restraining the defendant from digging any channel in the plaintiff's lands, S. Nos. 132, 133 and 134 of Surampalem village and for other reliefs. The defendant contended that the channel was a supply channel to Raju tank, that the bed of the channel belonged to the Government and that they were entitled to restore the channel to its original condition. The District Munsif decreed the suit; but, on appeal, the Subordinate Judge reversed the decree and dismissed the suit. He held that the plaintiff failed to make out that the bed belonged to him and that the acts of the Government are unauthorised. The plaintiff has consequently filed the Second Appeal.
(2.)The two questions that arise for consideration in the Second Appeal are, whether a channel existed and whether it is a supply channel, as contended by the Government. The plaintiff who has come to Court praying for a declaration and injunction has not produced his patta to enable the Court to ascertain what exactly was granted to him. The several documents referred to by the Subordinate Judge in paragraphs 9 to 14 clearly show that a channel existed on the land. The case of the plaintiff that there was no channel is not true.
(3.)The next question is, whether the bed of the channel belonged to the plaintiff. There is no definite evidence as to the origin of the stream. It is not clear whether it has been in existence before the ryotwari settlement or when it formed. The karnam examined as D.W. 5 states that "from the last 40 years and above, water is flowing through red-line kaluva". In the descriptive memoir of Surampalem marked as Exhibit B-9, it is stated as follows:-
"It must be distinctly borne in mind that a deduction of 25 per cent. both for wet and dry lands has been made from the gross produce on account of unfavourable seasons and on account of any roads, channels, banks, paths, etc., that may have been measured in with the cultivated area. The fact of the inclusion therefore any Government poramboke in any re-survey field does confer on the cultivator of that field the right of entering on such poramboke of if in any way interfering with it, and any unauthorised encroachment on such poramboke will be severely dealt with."

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.