LexVATTICHERUKURU VILLAGE PANCHAYAT AND ORS versus NORI VENKATARAMA DEEKSHITHULU AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
r ~ ' VATTICHERUKURU VILLAGE PANCHAYAT AND ORS. A v. NORI VENKATARAMA DEEKSHITHULU AND ORS. APRIL 26, 1991 [N.M. KASLIWAL AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] B A.P. Gram Panchayat Act, 1964--Sectiims 64 and 65-Property of income belongs to or administered for benefit of villagers in common-Vests in Gram Panchayat. A.P. Gram Panchayat Act, 1964--Section 85-Vesting of Water courses and tanks, lands used by public with Gram Panchayat- Assumption of management by Government, subject to villagers' pre- scriptive right. A.P. lnams (Abolition and Conversion 'into Ryotwari) Act, 1956-Section 8-Tank-Grant of ryotwari patta to users of inam land-Conclusive nature of their right, title and interest. Constitution of India, 1950-Preamble, Chapter IV read with section 9, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-Social legislation-Con- ferring power and jurisdiction on Tribunals-Orders passed by them- Pinality-Exclusion of jurisdiction of Civil Courts-Purpose of- Decisions of Revenue Courts under section 3 read with section 7, Jnams Act-Whether retriable in Civil Court. Words and Phrases-'Vest', 'Vested', 'Vesting'-Meaning of. c D E Civil Appeal Nos. 931 of 1977 and 200 of 1978 relate to the same F dispute though arose from two suits and separae judgments. Civil Appeal No. 931 of 1977 arose out of the suit for possession by the Gram Panchayat against the descendants of the grantee of inam. The suit was dismissed by the Trial Court and was confirmed by the High Court and the High Court granted leave under Art. 133. G Civil Appeal No. 200 of 1978 arose out of the suit for possession and mesne profits which was laid by the descendants of the grantee of inam. The pleadings are the same in both cases. A Zamindar granted 100 acres of land .in inam to dig, preserve H 531 532 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1991] 2 S.C.R. A and maintain a tank in favour of the predecessors of the respondents of C.A. No. 931/77. In 1700 A.D.i.e., 1190 Fasli, the tank was dug by the villagers and ever since, the villagers were using the tank for their drinking purpose B and perfected their right by prescription. In course of time the tank was silted up and fre•lt water existed only in and around 30 acres. The grantee's descendants-respondents did not make any repairs. Grass and trees had been grown in the rest of the area and was being enjoyed. c Under section 3 of the A.P. loams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, (Act XXXVII of 1956) Ryotwari Patta was granted to the respondents in individual capacity and on appeal the Revenue Divi- sional Officer confirmed the same and it became final, as it was not challenged any further. D On 7. 7 .1965, the Gram Panchayat - the appellant in C.A. No. 931/77 took unilateral possession of the tank and ever since, it was exercising possession, supervision and control over it. After the expiry of three years from the date of dispossession, the E respondents flied a suit for possession based on title. Earlier thereto the appellant-Gram Panchayat had flied a suit for possession. The Trial Court found that the tank was a 'public trust', the appellants would he hereditary trustees and could be removed only by taking action under s. 77 of the A.P. Hindu Charitable and Religious F Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 and that the respondents had acquired title by adverse possession. Accordingly the snit for possession was decreed relegating the flling of a separate application for mesne profits. On appeal, the High Conrt reversed the decree and held that the G tank was a pnblic tank, and the tank and the lands stood vested in the Gram Panchayat under A.P. Gram Panchayat Act, 1964. Since, the Gram Panchayat was in possession from Joly 7, 1966, thongh disposses- sed the respondents forcibly and as the snit was not under s. 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, but one based on title, it called for no inter- ference and dismissed the snit. This Court granted leave to appeal H under Article 136. .. - ~ 7' _,,_ ~ \- VILLAGE PANCHAYAT v. DEEKSHJTHULU 533 The respondents in C.A. No. 931/77 (the appellants in C.A. No. 200/78) contended that in view of the entries of the Inam Fair Register, the tank was a public trust and not a public tank; they could not be dispossessed until recourse made under section 77 of the A.P. Charit- able and Religious Institutions and Endowments Act; that under the Gram Panchayat Act, the lands did not vest in the Gram Panchayat; and that since
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.