IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 926 of 2009 Between: 1 Sri Y. Bal Raju, W/o. Y. Mallaiah, R/o. 1-4-880/36, Gandhinagar, New Bakaram, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 Smt. Y.B. Madhavi, W/o. Y. Bala Raju, R/o. 1-4-880/36, Gandhinagar, New Bakaram, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Y. Sai Kiran, S/o. Y. Bala Raju, R/o. 1-4-880/36, Gandhinagar, New Bakaram, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act 1982 at Hyderabad. 2 Sri B. Sohan Lal, S/o. B. Anantharam, Died per LRs Sri B. Shyam, S/o. B. Sohanlal, R/o. H.No. 3-108, Sri Satya Anantha's Tirumala Towers Flat No.103, Gangaram, Chandanagar, Serilingampally, Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. 3 B. Shyam, B/o. Sohanlal, R/o. H.No. 3-108, Sri Satya Ananth's Tirumala Towers, Flat No.103, Gangaram, Chananagar, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District 4 Sri K. Krishna Appala Naidu, S/o. Appa Rao, R/o. H.No. 2-113/2/3, Sainath Colony, Chandanagar, Srilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. 5 Sri J. Sreenivasa Rao, S/o. J. Govardhan Rao, R/o. H.No. 2-113/2/3, Sainath Colony, Chandanagar, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. 6 Sri V. Ramurthy, S/o. VEnkateswarla Sharma, R/o. Plot No.23, Sainath Colony, Chandanagar, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District. 7 N. Jagadiswar Reddy, S/o. N. Somi Reddy, R/o. H.No. 1-4-249/37/7, Suryapet, Nalgonda District. ...RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, order or Orders, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the Order dated 23-12-2008 passed by the 1st Respondent in IA No. 1102/2008 in LGC No. 6/2004 and quash the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.ASHOK ANAND KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : O R D E R :- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the order dated 23.12.2009 in I.A.No.1102 of 2008 in L.G.C.No.6 of 2004 passed by the 1st respondent-Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, Hyderabad, whereby the petition filed under Order 8 Rule- 1(A) CPC was dismissed to the extent of the reception of xerox copy of the Memorandum of Settlement, dated 18.12.1993 for marking as an exhibit. Sri S. Ashok Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, has strenuously contended that valuable rights accrued to the petitioners based on the Memorandum of Settlement dated 18.12.1993. He also contends that on earlier occasion, certified copy of the said document was produced before the 1st respondent in L.G.C.No.6 of 2004 and sought to be marked, but the same was not marked on the ground that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Serilingampally, who issued it, cancelled the same later, and therefore, the petitioners took steps and obtained xerox copy of the Memorandum of Settlement and also obtained a certificate regarding stamp papers from the Commissioner & Inspector General of Registration & Stamps, A.P., Hyderabad, which show that the stamp papers, on which the said document is endorsed, were sold to the vendor of the petitioners. The petitioners, therefore, gave a notice dated 8.11.2008 to the 3rd respondent to produce the original notarized Memorandum of Settlement dated 18.12.1993 and the 3rd respondent issued a reply notice dated 24.11.2008 denying the existence of the original of the alleged Memorandum of Settlement. Apart from raising other contentions thereupon, the petitioners have filed the impugned Application No.1102 of 2008 before the Special Court under Order 8 Rule-1(A) CPC requesting the Court to receive xerox copy of the Memorandum of Settlement and the original endorsement issued by the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration & Stamps. The Special Court, in the impugned order, has received the original endorsement issued by the Commissioner and Inspector General of Registration & Stamps, but has disallowed the reception of xerox copy of the Memorandum of Settlement. The learned counsel contends that the petitioners are entitled to rely upon the said xerox copy as a secondary evidence to establish the existence and genuineness of its contents and proof of the original Memorandum of Settlement. We have perused the record as well as the impugned order. The contention of the petitioners that the xerox copy of Memorandum of Settlement ought to have been received is not tenable inasmuch as the requirements of Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act (for short “the Act”) are necessarily to be fulfilled by the petitioners before they seek to give secondary evidence. The loss of original has not been accounted for nor the ingredients under Section 65 of the Act are fulfilled in this case. The exchange of notices prior to filing the present petition between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent clearly show that the existence of such document is seriously disputed by the 2nd respondent, and in such an event, the reception of xerox copy of the Memorandum of Settlement was rightly refused by the Special Court. We, therefore, find that the impugned order does not suffer from any irregularity warranting correction by this Court in exercise of its Certiorari jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. No costs. _______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J 27th January, 2009 _______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J bcj