IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI And THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU Writ Petition Nos.17171 & 19872 of 1999 Writ Petition No: 17171 of 1999 Between: 1 Kumare Nagesh S/o.Late Narasimha (Kumare Nagesh rep. by its natural guardian and mother Smt.Yellamma) R/o. H.No-8-2-684/32/60,Road No.12, Banjara Hill, Hyderabad 2 Kumare Ramamma S/o. Late Narasimha (Kumare Ramamma rep. by his natural gauardian and mother, Smt.Yellamma) R/o. H.No-8-2-684/32/60,Road No.12, Banjara Hills Hyderabad 3 Kumare Lalitha D/o.Late Narasimha (Kumare Lalitha rep. by her natural gauardian and mother Smt.Yellamma) R/o. H.No-8-2-684/32/60,Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad 4 Kumare Yellamma W/o.Late Narasimha, R/o. H.No-8-2-684-/32/60,Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad 5 Kumare Yellaiah S/o.Late Yenkaiah R/o.H.No 10-4-771/302, Ghandi Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyd. 6 Kumare Chinna Narasimha S/o.Yenkaiah R/o.H.No 10-4-771/302, Ghandi Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyd. 7 Kumare Durgaiah S/o.Late Yenkaiah R/o.H.No 10-4-771/302, Ghandi Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyd. 8 Kumare Muthamma W/o.Late Yenkaiah Kumare Muthamma R/o.H.No 10-4-771/302, Ghandi Nagar, Masab Tank, Hyd. 9 Yeluma Kotamma d/o.Late Yenkaiah Kumare Kotamma R/o.H.No.10-4-771/302 Ghandi Nagar,Masab Tank, Hyd. .... PETITIONERS AND 1 Syed Hameed Akber S/o.Late Syed Ali rep. by Sri Syed Siraj Akbar as Attorney holding the general power R/o.10-3-282/A/B, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad 2 Syed Mustafa Akbar S/o.Late Syed Ali Akber rep. by Sri Syed Siraj Akbar Attorney holding the General Power R/o.10-3-282/A/B, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad 3 Mrs .Sabina N.H Jafferi W/o. Syed Noor Ui Hussain Jafferi rep. by Sri Siraj Akbar as Attorney holding the General Power R/o.10-3-282/A/B, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad 4 Mrs.Sajida Mirza W/o.Mirza Abid rep.by Sri Syed Siraj Akber as Attorney holding the General Power R/o.10-3-282/A/B, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad 5 Syed Siraj Akbar S/o.Late Syed Ali Akbar rep. by Sri Syed Siraj Akbar as Attorney holding General Power R/o.10-3-282/A/B, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad 6 The JJ Co-operative Housing Society rep. by its Secretary B.Lakshmi Pershad S/o.Bala Pershad 5-4-484, Station Road, Nampally, Hyderabad 7 The State of A.P. through its Collector, Hyderabad District Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS 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 and order or a direction or a Writ more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Certiorari quashing the Judgment of the Special Court under A.P Land Grabbing Prohibition Act delivered on 12-7-99 passed in LGC No.97/96 on the file of the said Court and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.A.SESHU Counsel for the Respondents: MR.P.S.MURTHY Writ Petition No: 19872 of 1999 Between: 1 Syed Hameed Akbar S/o.Late Syed Ali Akbar Syed Hameed Akbar R/o.10-3-282, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad Represented by their G.P.A Syed Siraj Akbar 2 Syed Mustafa Akbar S/o.Late Syed Ali Akbar Syed Mustafa Akbar R/o.10-3-282, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad Represented by their G.P.A Syed Siraj Akbar 3 Mrs.Sabina N.H. Jafferi W/o.Syed Noor Ul Hassan Jafferi Mrs.Sabina N.H.Jafferi R/o.10-3-282, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad Represented by their G.P.A Syed Siraj Akbar 4 Mrs.Sajada Mirza W/o.Mirza Abid Mrs.Sajada Mirza R/o.10-3-282, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad Represented by their G.P.A Syed Siraj Akbar 5 Syed Siraj Akbar S/o.Late Syed Ali Akbar R/o.10-3-282, Humayun Nagar, Hyderabad Represented by their G.P.A Syed Siraj Akbar 6 The J.J. Cooperative Housing Society Represented by its Secretary B.Lakshmi Pershad S/o.Bala Pershad, 60 yrs R/o.5-4-484,Nampally Road, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 Kumare Nagesh S/o.Late Narasimha R/o.8-2-684/32/60, Road No.12,Banjara Hills,Hyderabad represented by their mother, Kumare Yellamma. 2 Kumare Ramamma S/o.Late Narasimha represented bu their mother, Kumare Yellamma R/o.8-2- 684/32/60, Road No.12,Banjara Hills,Hyderabad 3 Kumare Lalitha D/o.Late Narasimha represented bu their mother, Kumare Yellamma. R/o.8-2- 684/32/60, Road No.12,Banjara Hills,Hyderabad 4 Kumare Yellamma W/o.Late Narasimha R/o.8-2-684/32/60, Road No.12,Banjara Hills,Hyderabad 5 Kumare Yellaiah S/o.Late Yenkaiah R/o.10-4-771/302,Ghandi Nagar,Masab Tank, Hyderabad 6 Kumare Chinna Narasimha S/o.Late Yenkaiah R/o.10-4-771/302,Ghandi Nagar,Masab Tank, Hyderabad 7 Kumare Durgaiah S/o.Late Yenkaiah R/o.10-4-771/302,Ghandi Nagar,Masab Tank, Hyderabad 8 Kumare Muthamma W/o.Late Yankaiah R/o.10-4-771/302,Ghandi Nagar,Masab Tank, Hyderabad 9 Yeluma Kotamma D/o.Late Yenkaiah R/o.10-4-771/302,Ghandi Nagar,Masab Tank, Hyderabad 10 Yemula Bangaramma (Died hence not necessary party) 11 Sri Kanaka Durga Temple Development Committee represented by Smt.K.Yellamma W/o.Late Narasimha, 42yrs R/o.8-2-684/32/60,Road No.12,Banjara Hills,Hyderabad 12 M.Venugopal Naidu S/o.Sri Naidu R/o.193/2 RT Vijayanagar colony Hyderabad 13 Special court under A.P Land Grabbing (prohibition) Act., 2nd floor, B.R.K.R Building, Tank Bund Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS 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 call for the records pertaining to L.G.C No.97 of 1996 and L.G.C No.65 of 1997 on the file of the special Court under A.P Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act and after pursuing the same, declare the common judgment dated 12-7-1999 of the said Special Court in the said two cases in so far as the findings in favour of the respondents No.11 and 12 in L.G.C. No.97 of 1996 and applicant in L.G.C No.65 of 1997 are concerned as contrary to law and facts and null and void and consequently allow the L.G.C No.97 of 1996 against respondents No.11 and 12 also and dismiss the L.G.C No.65 of 1997 by holding that Sri Kanakadurga Temple Trust Committee has no right title of interest in any part of the L.G.C No.97 of 1996 of one Acre 30 Guntas in S.No129/49 (New S.No.330) corresponding to Town Survey No.9 situate at Banjara Hills, Hyderabad and further direct the special Court under the A.P Land Grabbing (prohibition) Act envisaged in the A.P Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act against Respondents 4 to 9 in L.G.C No.97 of 1996 by issue of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ order or direction and pass such orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.S.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: Order:(per the Hon’ble Dr.Justice G. Yethirajulu) 1. Since these writ petitions relate to an extent of Ac.1-30 guntas situated in S.No.129/49 (new S.No.330) of Shaikpet Village, Road No.12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad and arise out of a common judgment of the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act and involve a common question of fact and law, they are clubbed together and this common judgment is delivered. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions are briefly as follows: 3. One late Syed Ali Akbar, father of applicants 1 to 5 in L.G.C. No.97 of 1996 was an academician who held high positions in the Nizam’s Educational Department. He was the owner of an extent of Ac.4-30 guntas situated in S.No.129/49 (old) of Shaikpet Village, which was granted to him by way of a patta in 1340 Fasli. In the year 1962 he divided the said land into four parts. The area of each of the plots 1 to 3 is one acre land while the area of the fourth plot is Ac.1-30 guntas. He sold away Plot Nos.1 to 3 to one Rani Seth, D. Suryanarayana Swamy and Ram Bhupaul respectively under registered sale-deeds dated 18-10-1962, 22-9-1962 and 10-10-1962 respectively and delivered possession to the vendees. He retained Plot No.4 admeasuring Ac.1-30 guntas for himself. Subsequently, in the year 1981 he sold away Plot No.4 to J.J. Cooperative Housing Society, applicant No.6 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996, and delivered possession of the land under an agreement of sale. The property in dispute in L.G.C.No.65 of 1996 is a part of Plot No.4 sold by Syed Ali Akbar. The property in dispute in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 is the entire extent of land covered by Plot No.4 i.e., Ac.1-30 guntas. Sri Syed Ali Akbar, the original owner of this property is stated to have delivered possession of the land to the society under an agreement of sale obviously to claim exemption under the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act (for short ‘the Ceiling Act’). He died in 1984. His three sons, two daughters and the alleged vendee viz., J.J.Cooperative Housing Society have jointly filed O.P.No.351 of 1994 under Sections 7-A and 8 of the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act (for short ‘the Act’) before the Special Tribunal-cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for an injunction restraining respondents 1 to 12 therein from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property covered by Plot No.4 and to declare the respondents therein as grabbers of the land and to punish them. The respondents 1 to 10 in O.P.No.351 of 1994 were claiming title and possession in respect of the entire extent of Ac.1-30 guntas covered by Plot No.4. Though the respondents contended that in a compromise partition decree passed in O.S.No.1407 of 1992 on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad an extent of 600 sq. yds. in Plot No.4 was set apart to Sri Kanakadurga Temple, represented by the 11th respondent in Writ Petition No.19872 of 1999, the said temple came to be constructed in the said site more than 25 years ago. The 11th respondent—temple filed O.S.No.2979 of 1993 on the file of the IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad against the office-bearers of the 6th petitioner—society for permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with the affairs of the temple from possession of the said site of 600 sq. yds. of land. Since the connected matters relating to S.No.129/49 are pending in the Special Court under A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, Hyderabad, all the connected matters were also transferred to the Special Court. O.P.No.351 of 1994 pending before the Special Tribunal- cum-Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad was transferred and numbered as L.G.C.No.97 of 1996. O.S.No.2979 of 1993 pending adjudication before the IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad was transferred and numbered as L.G.C.No.65 of 1997. 4. Though the Special Court delivered a common judgment in L.G.C.Nos.114, 115, 116, 258 of 1995, 97 of 1996 and 65 of 1997, the present writ petitions relate to the dispute in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 and L.G.C.No.65 of 1997 only. Therefore, we are not concerned with the land covered by the other cases. 5. As already stated supra, the applicant—temple in L.G.C.No.65 of 1997 claims ownership of an extent of 600 sq. yds of land in Plot No.4 of S.No.129/49 (old) viz., Ac.1-30 guntas whereas the legal heirs of Syed Akbar Ali viz., applicants 1 to 5 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 contend that their father sold the entire extent of Plot No.4 viz., Ac.1-30 guntas of land to the 6th applicant—society in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 under an agreement of sale. On behalf the temple it was pleaded that Sri Syed Ali Akbar filed declarations under the Ceiling Act and the urban land ceiling authorities have determined that the extent covered by Plot No.4 i.e., Ac.1-30 guntas of land as surplus land and hence it stood vested in the government and as such Sri Syed Ali Akbar has no right to sell it to the society in 1981 under an agreement of sale and that the applicants in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 have no locus standi to file the said case. Since no exemption was granted by the urban land ceiling authorities or the government, the alleged sale agreement in favour of the society said to have been executed by Syed Ali Akbar is void. 6. The State of Andhra Pradesh claimed that the disputed land covered by an extent of Ac.1-30 guntas is a government land, therefore, neither the applicants nor the respondents have any right over the said land. 7. The Special Court after taking into consideration the contentions of the respective parties, settled the following issues for enquiry in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996: 1. Whether the petition is not maintainable before this Court (Special Tribunal) and whether this court has jurisdiction to entertain this petition? 2. Whether the petitioners are the owners of the petition schedule property and whether the respondents have a right to grab the said property unauthorisedly? 3. Whether the respondents have been in lawful possession of the petition schedule land? 4. To what relief? Additional Issue: Whether the first respondent and his predecessor-in-title perfected their title by adverse possession? 8. The case of the applicant—temple in L.G.C. No.65 of 1997 is that one K. Venkaiah who was the owner and possessor of an extent of Ac.1- 30 guntas of land situated in S.No.129/49 of Shaikpet Village constructed Sri Kanaka Durga Temple in a portion of the said land. After the death of the said Venkaiah, his children partitioned the said extent of Ac.1-30 guntas under a compromise partition decree made in O.S.No.1407 of 1992 on the file of the II Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Under the said partition decree, the parties have divided the balance extent of Ac.1-30 guntas of land after setting apart 600 sq. yds. of land for the said temple. A full-fledged temple has been in existence in the said extent of 600 sq. yds. of land and certain persons claiming themselves to be the office-bearers of J.J. Cooperative Housing Society have made attempts to demolish the temple and grab away the land earmarked for the temple. Therefore, the temple filed O.S.No.2979 of 1993 before the IX Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for a perpetual injunction restraining the office-bearers of the society and their men from interfering with the temple’s peaceful possession of an extent of 600 sq. yds. of land out of the extent of Ac.1-30 guntas of land. 9. The respondents in L.G.C.No.65 of 1997 contended that by the date of filing the suit, the temple was in existence in the said land, that the alleged temple is the creation of land grabbers to grab the land that was already sold by Syed Ali Akbar to J.J. Cooperative Housing Society under an agreement of sale dated 22-7-1981 and that the alleged Trust Board of the temple is neither valid nor entitled to maintain the suit. 10. The Special Court by considering the averments made by the respective parties framed the following issues in L.G.C.No.65 of 1997: 5. Whether the temple is entitled to permanent injunction as prayed for against the respondents therein, who are the office-bearers of J.J. Cooperative Housing Society in an extent of 600 sq. yds., which is part of Ac.1-30 guntas of land in S.No.129/49? 6. To what relief? 11. The Special Court conducted joint trial in all the cases and recorded common evidence in L.G.C.No.114 of 1995. The Special Court after considering the evidence and the arguments advanced by the respective counsel delivered a common judgment on 12-7-1999. 12. Insofar as the dispute in L.G.C.Nos.97 of 1996 and 65 of 1997 is concerned, the findings recorded by the Special Court are as follows: 7. The Special Tribunal heard issue No.1 as preliminary issue and decided it as per the directions of the High Court in C.R.P.No.3149 of 1994 in favour of the applicants by its order dated 11-7-1995 holding that the Special Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain this petition. The said finding was confirmed by the High Court by its order dated 27-2-1996 made in C.R.P.No.2978 of 1996 as seen from the docket entry dated 24-11-1997 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996. Hence, we need not go into issue No.1 once again, since it has already been decided in favour of the applicants. 8. The applicants 1 to 5 are the legal heirs of Syed Ali Akbar, who was the original owner of the land of an extent of Ac.1-30 guntas in S.No.129/49 of Shaikpet Village covered by the application schedule. The applicants 1 to 5 are still the owners of the said property since no registered sale-deed was executed in favour of the 6th applicant—society, which is in possession of the said property (except an extent of 600 sq. yds.) in pursuance of Ex.A.74(A)—agreement of sale obtained from it by late Syed Ali Akbar and that the possession and ownership of the said property of the applicants in L.G.C. No.97 of 1996 is subject to the decision of the urban land ceiling authorities regarding the determination of the surplus land of Syed Ali Akbar, and the decision of the government to grant or refuse exemption to this land from the provisions of the Urban Land Ceiling Act and that the respondents have no right to grab or attempt to grab the said land. 9. The respondents 1 to 9 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 were never in possession of any portion of the application schedule extent of Ac.1-30 guntas covered by Plot No.4 and as such the question of they being in lawful possession of the application schedule property does not arise and that Sri Kanaka Durga Temple represented by R.11 and R.12 is in possession of an extent of 600 sq. yds. out of Ac.1-30 guntas of land in S.No.129/49 as mentioned in the schedule appended to L.G.C.No.65 of 1997. 10. The first respondent in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 did not take any plea of adverse possession and did not adduce any proof of it and as such, the question of the first respondent and his predecessors in title perfecting title by adverse possession to the schedule property does not arise. 11. Sri Kanaka Durga Temple, the applicant in L.G.C.No.65 of 1997, which is in settled peaceful possession of the application schedule extent of 600 sq. yds. out of Ac.1- 30 guntas in S.No.129/49 is entitled to be in possession of the said property till such time it is lawfully evicted therefrom through legally constituted suit or action to be successfully initiated against it and in the meanwhile the applicant temple is entitled to a perpetual injunction against the respondents till such time it is lawfully evicted. 13. Aggrieved by the judgment of the Special Court, the respondent Nos.1 to 9 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 filed Writ Petition No.17171 of 1999 seeking to issue a writ of Certiorari and to pass an order quashing the common judgment of the Special Court dated 12-7-1999 in L.G.C.Nos.114, 115, 116, 258 of 1995, 97 of 1996 and 65 of 1997 insofar as it relates to L.G.C.No.97 of 1996. 14. The applicants in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 filed Writ Petition No.19872 of 1999 seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the findings of the Special Court in favour of respondent Nos.11 and 12 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 in the common judgment dated 12-7-1999 as 1) null and void and contrary to law and facts, 2) to dismiss L.G.C.No.65 of 1997 filed by respondent No.11—Sri Kanakadurga Temple in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 by holding that the temple and the Trust Committee of the temple have no right, title or interest in any part of the schedule property of L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 to the extent of Ac.1-30 guntas in S.No.129/49 (new Survey No.330) corresponding to Town Survey No.9 situated at Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, and 3) to direct the Special Court to initiate criminal prosecution under the Act against respondent Nos.4 to 9 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996. 15. In the light of the contentions of the respective parties, and in the light of the judgment of the Special Court, the following are the points for consideration by this Court: 12. Whether the findings of the Special Court in favour of respondents 11 and 12 in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 are contrary to law and whether the order of the Special Court granting perpetual injunction in favour of respondents 11 and 12 is liable to be set aside and consequently whether L.G.C.No.65 of 1997 is liable to be dismissed holding that Sri Kanaka Durga Temple has no right, title or interest in an extent of 600 sq. yds. of land, which is a part of Ac.1-30 guntas of land in S.No.129/49? 13. Whether the order of the Special Court in L.G.C.No.97 of 1996 dated 12-7-1999 is liable to be quashed? Points: 16. In the earlier civil litigation the respondents 1 to 10 took a stand that one Mohd. Ghousuddin purchased an extent of Ac.1-30 guntas covered by Plot No.4 from Syed Ali Akbar under an agreement of sale in the year 1965 and subsequently the said Ghousuddin transferred his rights in favour of Sri K. Venkaiah, the ancestor of respondents 1 to 10 on 28-9-1965 and delivered possession of the land to him. Subsequently after the death of the said Venkaiah, respondents 1 to 10 being the sons and daughters of the said Venkaiah have been in possession and enjoyment of the said land. 17. In this case, respondents 1 to 10 did not file any separate counter claiming any right or interest in any portion of Ac.1-30 guntas of land. They filed a Memo adopting the counter filed by respondent No.12. The 12th respondent took a plea that the urban land ceiling authorities have determined the extent of Ac.1-30 guntas as surplus holding of Syed Ali Akbar and as such the land stood vested with the government, therefore, the legal representatives of Syed Ali Akbar or his vendee cannot claim any right in the said land. The respondents 1 to 10 did not take the abovementioned plea while adopting the counter of respondent No.12. None of the respondents 1 to 10 were examined to prove their title or possession on any portion of Ac.1-30 guntas of land. 18. The Special Deputy Collector, Land Protection, who was examined as R.W.8 conceded that various documents covered by Exs.B.5 to B.36 reflected the name of Sri Syed Ali Akbar as pattadar of R.S.No.330 corresponding to old S.No.129/49. He further admitted that in Ex.A.66— Town Survey Land Register the name of Syed Ali Akbar is shown as registered holder of the land covered by S.No.129/49. The entries in Ex.A.40 to A.52—certified copies of pahanies also reflected the name of Sri Syed Ali Akbar as pattadar of the land. The evidence placed by petitioners amply established that the land in question is a patta land and it stood in the name of Syed Ali Akbar. The other relevant documents placed before the Special Court also established that the land in question is a patta land and it stood in the name of Syed Ali Akbar and it does not belong to the government. 19. The respondents 1 to 9 contended that in the year 1965 one Mohd. Ghousuddin purchased an extent of Ac.1-30 guntas under an agreement of sale and subsequently the said Ghousuddin with the consent of Syed Ali Akbar transferred his rights in favour of Sri K. Venkaiah, the ancestor of respondents 1 to 9; later the property was divided among them after partition suit by leaving 600 sq. yds. to respondent No.11—temple. 20. The fifth petitioner who was examined as P.W.6 stated that his father late Syed Ali Akbar studied in Cambridge University, England and worked as the Principal of Nizam College for a long time and subsequently retired as a Director of Education in the erstwhile Hyderabad State in 1947. Even after retirement he worked as the Principal of Anwar-Ul-Uloom College for a long time. He produced Ex.A.32 of 1340 Fasli along with Ex.A.33—English translation, which is a notice issued by the first Taluqdar of Atraf Balda District calling upon Syed Ali Akbar to pay the land revenue for one year @ Rs.5/- per acre and also to pay Rs.50/- per acre towards possessory right for granting patta in an extent of Ac.4- 30 guntas in S.No.129/49 of Shaikpet Village. Ex.A.34 is a Pouthi Book issued in the name of Syed Ali Akbar, Ex.A.35 is an entry in the Pouthi Book regarding the payment of Rs.237-0-8 ps. in 1342 Fasli by Syed Ali Akbar in respect of the same land. Ex.A.37—entry also reflected that Syed Ali Akbar paid land revenue of Rs.25-3-9 ps. for 1344 Fasli in respect of his patta land. In Ex.A.39 to A.52—certified copies of pahanis relating to the years 1960-61 to 1979-80 are also showing Syed Ali Akbar as the owner and pattadar of the entire extent. The entries in the above mentioned documents and the evidence of P.W.6 established that Sri Syed Ali Akbar was in possession and enjoyment of the property and he was