Writ Appeal Allows Revenue Authorities to Proceed with Mutation During Pending Civil Suits
In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed that the pendency of a civil suit does not preclude revenue authorities from exercising their statutory powers under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. The division bench, comprising Justices Ravi Nath Tilhari and Purushottam Kumar Chintalapudi, allowed the writ appeal filed by Makam Sumith, thereby setting aside the judgment passed in W.P. No. 2669 of 2021.
The dispute arose over the mutation of land admeasuring 9.61 acres situated in Potladurthi Village. The case revolved around the revenue record entries and the subsequent orders passed by the Tahsildar, Yerraguntla Mandal, in favor of Makam Ramanjaneyulu, the father of the appellant, and later to the appellant himself. These orders were challenged by the writ petitioners, who argued that the Tahsildar lacked jurisdiction to effect such mutations due to a pending civil suit (O.S. No. 33 of 2017) for title declaration.
The court observed that mutation proceedings are summary in nature and primarily serve fiscal purposes. Such proceedings do not confer or prove title and are subservient to any declaration of title by a competent civil court. Furthermore, the judgment emphasized that Section 8(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, does not bar revenue authorities from proceeding with mutation during the pendency of a civil suit. Instead, it provides a remedy for aggrieved parties to seek declaration of their title before a civil court, which would then necessitate an amendment of revenue entries in accordance with the court's declaration.
The bench clarified that the ruling in "V. Goutham Rao v. Revenue Divisional Officer," a cited case in the judgment, does not suggest that revenue proceedings must halt during civil litigation. The court noted that the said judgment merely highlights the pragmatic approach of seeking civil court intervention in cases of serious title disputes, but it does not legally bar revenue processes during such disputes.
In conclusion, the High Court's decision underscores the autonomy of revenue authorities to carry out their statutory functions, even as related civil suits are underway, unless specifically restrained by a civil court order. It opens the door for the writ petitioners to explore statutory remedies against the orders dated August 4, 2017, and November 13, 2018, through appropriate legal channels.
Bottom Line :
Pendency of a civil suit does not operate as a bar to proceedings under the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971. Revenue authorities are not precluded from exercising their statutory powers during the pendency of a suit for declaration of title.
Statutory provision(s): Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971, Section 8(2); Specific Relief Act, 1963, Chapter VI.
Makam Sumith v. Gummireddy Bharath Kumar Reddy, (Andhra Pradesh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2958641
