SRISANJEEVA ANJANEYA SWAMY VARI DEVSTHANAM Vs. THOKKULA DASARADHARAMAYYA
LAWS(APH)-2008-11-43
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on November 25,2008

SRISANJEEVA ANJANEYA SWAMY VARI DEVSTHANAM Appellant
VERSUS
THOKKULA DASARADHARAMAYYA Respondents




JUDGEMENT

D.S.R.VARMA,J. - (1.)HEARD both the Counsel at the stage of admission.
(2.)AGGRIEVED by the order dated 2. 5. 2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W. P. No. 10512/2008 the present writ appeal is filed.
Sri Sanjeeva Anjaneya Swamy Vari Devasthanam, Rajahmundry represented by its Archaka-cum-Trustee is the appellant herein (for short hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant - Temple' ). From the material available on record it could be seen that the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Rajahmundry by his proceedings in Rc. No. A4/5755/2007 dated 28. 6. 2007 submitted proposals under Section 83 of the Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') stating the 1st respondent herein is an encroacher over the Temple land bearing Door No. 8-9-1 in 150 Sq. yards of site, Tank Bund, Rajahmundry. Based on the proposal, a case in O. A. No. 114/2007 was instituted by the appellant - Temple. The case of the temple is that the 1st respondent took the scheduled land on lease during the year 1982 from the then trustee without approval from the competent authority and however, as there was default in payment of damages for use and occupation of the land in the year 1998, the Temple got issued notice on 9. 4. 1998 and the 1st respondent issued reply dated 19. 4. 1998 with false allegations contending that there is an oral lease agreement dated 15. 7. 1997. The further case of the Temple is that the 1st respondent filed suit in O. S. No. 487/1998 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Rajahmundry for specific performance of the oral agreement dated 15. 7. 1997 and for permanent injunction and the said suit was dismissed on 7. 4. 2004 and the appeal filed in A. S. No. 51/2004 on the file of the Principal District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry also ended in dismissal by judgment and decree dated 5. 12. 2006. The Deputy Commissioner, Endowments Department by order dated 3. 4. 2008 considering the evidence and the material on record and in exercise of the power vested in him under Section 83 of the Act held that the 1st respondent is an encroacher and directed that the vacant land shall be handed over within a period of 30 days from the date of the order and in case of default, action as provided under Section 84 of the Act was directed to be initiated.

(3.)AGGRIEVED by the above order dated 3. 4. 2008 the 1st respondent herein filed writ petition alleging that after the disposal of the first appeal in A. S. No. 51/2005 on 5. 12. 2006, there was a mutual understanding between him and the Temple on 30. 12. 2006 and by virtue of the same, he was allowed to continue his cement casting business and he incurred an amount of Rs. 22,000.00 towards repairs and the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments by not considering these aspects allowed O. A. No. 114/2007 and declared him as encroacher under Section 83 of the Act and, therefore, he sought to set aside the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments dated 3. 4. 2008.
;


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