THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RA WP No. 16199 of 2011 & WP No. 18107 of 2011 COMMON ORDER: These two writ petitions can be dealt with together. WP No. 16199 of 2011 was instituted by Smt.Ba Balamma, W/o Venkataramaiah, R/o Dharmavaram. WP No. 18 2011 is instituted by three individuals viz., Smt.A.Syamalamma Venkataramanappa, A.Lalitha, W/o Ramaseshaiah, A.Ramases S/o Venkataramanappa, Residents of Dharmavaram. WP No. 16199 of 2011 has been instituted challeng validity of the proceedings dated 5.5.2011 issued by the Re Divisional Officer, Dharmavaram, ordering for cancellation pattedar passbooks and title deeds issued in favour o A.Ramanjaneyulu, as well as Smt. Baddela Balamma. The Re Divisional Officer directed, the Tahsildar, Kanaganapalli Mandal, to give an opportunity to all pattedars and to conduct an enquiry in and thereafter issue the pattedar passbooks and title deeds in fav the eligible pattedars in accordance with the Record of Rights Act, 1971. The case set up by Smt.Baddela Balamma, which is a same to this limited extent, as was set up by the petitioners in W 18107 of 2011, is that one Smt. Nese Lakshmidevamma had purc land of an extent of Ac.29.70 cts situate in Sy No. 583 of Da village, Kanaganapalli Mandal, Anantapur District, through a reg sale deed dated 5.2.1938. It is the case of the petitioner in W 16199 of 2011 that the aforementioned Smt.Lakshmidevamma ex an unregistered Will on 14.6.1977 bequeathing the entire prop favour of Smt. Baddela Balamma. Further, the said Lakshmidev died subsequently in the year 1979 and thus her maternal aun Baddela Balamma has succeeded to the entire property refer supra as Smt. Lakshmidevamma died without any issues. Whereas the case of the petitioners in WP No. 18 2011 is that Smt. Lakshmidevamma has adopted Sri Krishna and Smt. Syamalamma, the 1st petitioner herein and that Sri K Murthy died and his daughter Smt.A.Lalitha, the 2nd petitioner is married to the 3rd petitioner Ramaseshaiah, w none other than the son of Smt.Syamalamma. Therefore, the peti in that writ petition have set up title to the property on the streng basis of the adoption of Sri Krishna Murthy and Smt. Syamalam Smt. Lakshmidevamma. The petitioners in this case assert tha Baddela Balamma, the petitioner in the other case an A.Ramanjaneyulu have not succeeded to the estate of Lakshmamma and on the basis of certain contentious documents Baddela Balamma and through her Sri Phakeer Reddy are trying to usurp the property in question. In terms of sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the RO 1971, the competent recording authority as soon as he receiv intimation in Form VI-A, he is required to conduct an enquiry in claim so made by providing an opportunity to all such persons w interested in the lands in question and thereafter either conce claim or reject the claim. An order passed in that regard is appe under sub-section (5) of Section 5 to the Revenue Divisional Offic further a revision is also provided thereafter to the Collector in te Section 9 of the said Act. In the instant case, the petitioners in WP No. 18 2011, have enclosed the death certificate of Smt. N.Lakshm which is recorded on 12.3.1979 with the Registrar of Births and D Dharmavaram. It is noted therein that Smt.Lakshmamma di 5.3.1979. They have also enclosed a death certificate issued Sub-Registrar of Births and Deaths, Hindupur, recording the death Y.Krishna Murthy on 1.9.2003, nearly 24 years later to Smt. Lakshmamma. It is pleaded by the peti herein that the said Y.Krishna Murthy is the one who has been ad by Smt.Lakshmamma. However, it is worth-noticing from this certificate, placed by the petitioners in WP No. 18107 of 2011 a 26 of the paper book, that the name of the father of Sri Y.Krishna is noted as Subba Nayudu. Whereas from the death cert enclosed at page 25 of the same paper book, relati Smt.N.Lakshmamma, her husband’s name was recorded as N. Ramappa. Therefore, an element of doubt is created in my mind whether Sri Y.Krishna Murthy is truly the adopted son of the dec N.Lakshmidevamma @ Lakshmamma or not. Similarly, the petitio WP No. 16199 of 2011, is claiming title to the property throu unregistered Will said to have been executed Smt.Lakshmidevamma. The said Will has not been prov accordance with law before any agency or Court, it appears, so fa reasons in this regard are not forthcoming. In this set of controversial fact situation, I cons inappropriate to entertain either of these two writ petitions. Both t petitions require collection of lot of evidence in support of the resp claims and counter claims of the petitioners. Until and un competent civil court returns a finding of fact, based upon the ev brought before it, in my opinion, it will be hazardous to guess right, amongst the 2 sets of petitioners, is predominant and pre one. I also feel that the Recording Authority, the Tahsildar, is n competent of the authorities to return a firm finding of fact in that re Therefore, it is for the petitioners in both these cases to invite a s finding of fact as to who can succeed legitimately to the estate deceased Smt.N.Lakshmidevamma @ Lakshmamma. Based such a decree and judgment of a competent civil court, the Rec Authority/ Competent Authority shall make necessary entries revenue record and then issue the pattedar passbooks and title in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 5 of the R of Rights Act, 1971. Until then, the Tahsildar, Kanaganapalli M shall not record/alter the entries relating to land of an extent of Ac cts in Sy No. 583 situated at Dadulur village, Kanaganapalle M Anantapur District in the revenue records. However, he will allow the person in occupation as of the lands, to continue to cultivate the same subject to the cond depositing Rs.1000/- (Rupees one thousand only) per acre, o other reasonable amount which the civil court might fix, for purp occupying and cultivating the lands for the interregnum period money deposited by the occupier of the land, will be kept in a d and the same may be made over in favour of the person who w declared to have succeeded to the estate of Smt.Lakshmideva The interim suspension granted by this court in WP No. 16199 o on 15.6.2011 shall stand modified accordingly. Both the writ pe shall stand disposed of. No costs. ------------------------ Nooty Ramamohana Knk Dt : 26.07.2011