Andhra Pradesh (Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books) Act, 1971

 Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — Section 113 — Andhra Pradesh (Record of Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books) Act, 1971 — Possession is prima facie proof of ownership, and the burden of proving otherwise lies on the party denying it, including the government — This appeal arises from a High Court judgment that reversed a Trial Court decree in favor of the appellants, who sought a declaration of title and recovery of possession of land they were dispossessed from by the State of Andhra Pradesh — The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by overlooking the appellants' long possession and failing to properly consider the presumption of ownership arising from possession under Section 113 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 — While acknowledging the State's need for land for public purposes, the Court criticized the high-handed dispossession without due process or compensation — Due to the construction of a DIET building on the land, the Court deemed it impractical to restore possession and directed the State to pay Rs. 70 lakhs as compensation to the appellants — The Court also emphasized the importance of adhering to Section 80 of the CPC regarding notices in suits against the government.

Appointment--Appointment of Lambardar by Collector considering merits of the candidates--High Court set aside the order in writ jurisdiction--Order of High Court not valid. Lambardar is not a Govt. servant.

sclaw.in

Cooperative Law--Revision--Recovery of dues--Recovery certificates issued against appellant for recovery of dues to cooperative bank--Petitioner filed application before Divisional Joint Registrar, who ordered to maintain status quo and set aside recovery certificate--High Court set aside impugned order--Appeal against--Order upheld by Supreme Court

sclaw.in

Courts below held that the petitioners had knowledge of the concession made in favour of C and negated their contention that they were not aware of the same till they signed the compromise petition before this Court in another appeal--Order, upheld--No reason to interfere with the judgment and order of the High Court impugned in these proceedings-

sclaw.in