LexTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM & ORS. versus BAGATHI KRISHNA RAO & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2010] 7 S.C.R. 280 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM & ORS. v. BAGATHI KRISHNA RAO & ANR. (Civil Appeal No.2754 of 2007) JUNE 2, 2010 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.) Code of civil procedure, 1908: c s.100 rlw s. 79, 0.27 r.1, 0.1, r.9, proviso and Article 300 of Constitution of India - Second appeal filed by District Collector and District Forest Officer - State not impleaded as a party - HELD: State of Andhra Pradesh was a party before the trial court as well as before the first appellate court - The 0 relief sought by the plaintiff was declaration of title of suit land which according to appellants was in favour of State of Andhra Pradesh and the suit land in physical possession of Forest Department - Thus, keeping in view the provisions of s. 79, r.1 of' 0.27, proviso to r.9 of 0.1 of the Code and Article 300 E of the Constitution, prima facie the State was a necessary party - Second appeal filed by the officials was not maintainable - High Court decided the second appeal without considering this important aspect of the matter - Judgment of High Court set aside - Case remanded to High Court to decide the second appeal afresh - Appellants permitted to F file an application for impleadment of State of Andhra Pradesh as appellant, which would be considered by High Court in accordance with law - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 300 - Party. G The State of Punjab Vs. The Okara Grain Buyers Syndicate Ltd., Okara & Anr. (1964) SCR 387 =AIR 1964 SC 669; Ranjeet Mal Vs. General Manager, Northern Railway, New Delhi & Anr., (1977) 2 SCR 409 =AIR 1977 SC 1701; Kali Prasad Agarwala (Dead by L.Rs.) & Ors. v. Mis. Bharat H 280 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM & ORS. v. 281 BAGATHI KRISHNA RAO & ANR. Coking Coal Limited & Ors. (1989) 2 SCR 283 =AIR 1989 A SC 1530; Sangamesh Printing Press v. Chief Executive Officer, Taluk Development Board (1999) 6 SCC 44; Chief Conservator of Forests, Government of A. P. Vs. Collector & Ors (2003) 2 SCR 180 = AIR 2003 SC 1805; Bal Niketan Nursery School Vs. Kesari Prasad (1987) 3 SCR 510 =AIR B 1987 SC 1970, relied on. s. 100 - Second appeal - Substantial question of law - High Court deciding the second appeal without framing any substantial question of law though making reference to the C pleadings taken in the second appeal, it discussed and <:J.ecided the question of law raised therein - HELD: Matter remanded to High Court to decide the second appeal afresh after framing the substantial question of law. Case Law Reference: D (1964) SCR 387 relied on para 8 (1977) 2 SCR 409 relied on para 9 (1989) 2 SCR 283 relied on para 10 E (1999) s sec 44 relied on para 11 (2003) 2 SCR 180 relied on para 12 (1987) 3 SCR 510 relied on para 13 F CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2754 of 2007. From the Judgment & Order dated 10.04.2006 of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Second Appeal No. 122 of 2006. G June Choudhary, C.K. Sucharita for the Appellants. R. Venkataramani, P. Raja Sekhar, K. Subba Rao, Aniruddha P. Mayee for the Respondents. H 282 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 7 S.C.R. A The following order of the Court was delivered ORDER 1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 10.4.2006 passed by the High Court 8 of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Second Appeal No.122/ 06 by which it dismissed the Second Appeal filed by the appellant affirming the judgments and order of the First Appellate Court dated 15.4.2005 passed in Appeal Suit No.121/2000 and of the Trial Court dated 28.7.2000 passed C in O.S. No.26/94. 2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this Appeal are that the respondents herein filed Original Suit No.26/94 for seeking declaration of title and possession of the suit land o adrneasuring Ac.8.90 cents situate within the erstwhile jamindari of Tarla Estate in Srikakulam District and for other consequential relief, i.e. permanent injunction from interfering in any manner with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of suit land, before the Senior Civil Judge at Sompeta. The E appellants/defendants filed written statement contending that the suit land being forest land had vested in the State of Andhra Pradesh and in order to substantiate the said averment it annexed the copy of the Gazette Notification, G.O. No.650 dated 25.9.1975 according to which possession and enjoyment F of land in di
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.