APHC010501982022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 30876/2022 Between: 1. SHEIK MASTAN SAHEB, S/O LATE S. DHASTAGIRI SAHEB, MUSLIM, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, RIO KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETA TO GOVERNMENT, LAW DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE CHAIRPERSON CUMJUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MANDAL LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE JCJ COURT BUILDINGS, PAKALA. 3. SHAIK KHADAR BHEE, W/O LATE S. BADE SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS. RIO KARNAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 4. SHAIK MAHABOOB BHASHA, S/O LATE S. BADE SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 5. SHAIK HASAN SAHEB DIED, S/O LATE S. CHANDU SAHEB, RIO KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA 2 MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 6. S JAHEEDA, W/O S. GAFAAR AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O SADUM VILLAGE, POST AND MANDAL. CHITTOOR DISTRICT., AP PIN 517123 7. S SHARMILA, W/O S.MALAMKSHA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O JANDRAPETA VILLAGE SADUM POST AND MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT., AP PIN 517123. 8. S PARVEEN, W/O S.HIDAYATHULLA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O D.NO 8/32, VEDANTHAPURAM VILLAGE, VINT COLONY, VEDANTHAPURAM POST, TIRUPATHI RURAL MANDAL, BALAJI DISTRICT., A.P PIN 517507. 9. S BARESHA, S/O HASAN SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/O. D.NO. 2/131, KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P PIN 517172. ( RESPONDENTS 6 TO 9 ARE LRS OF THE DECEASED SHAIK HASAN SAHEB ) 10. SHAIK ANWAR BASHA, S/O LATE S. CHANDU SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 11. SHAIK MASTAN SAHEB DIED, S/O LATE S. CHANDU SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS.R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 12. SHAIK ZAREENA BEE, W/O LATE S. GOUSE SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 13. SHAIK HANEEF REDDI BHASHA DIED, S/O LATE S.GOUSE SAHEB, R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 14. S SHEEMA ARSHIAM, W/O S.ABDUL AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O DASARI GUDEM VILLAGE, KALLUR POST, PULICHERLA 3 MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P PIN 517113. 15. S ARSHAD, S/O LATE S.HANEEF AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/O K KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P PIN 517172. ( RESPONDENTS 14 AND 15 ARE LRS OF THE DECEASED SHEIK HANEEF @ REDDI BHASHA ) 16. SHAIK KAREEMULLA, S/O LATE S.GOUSE SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 17. SHAIK MAHABOOB BEE, W/O LATE HYDER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS (DIED) RIO KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 18. SHAIK SARVAR SAHEB, S/O LATE HYDER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS (DIED), R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 19. SHAIK KHAJA RAHAMTHULLA, S/O LATE HYDER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 20. SHAIK KHADAR BHASHA, S/O LATE HYDER SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 21. SHAIK GOWSUNEE, W/O LATE KHAJA SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS (DIED), R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 22. SHAIK SHABANA, D/0 LATE KHAJA SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN 517172 4 23. S RESHAMA, D/O LATE S.GOWSUNNEE, W/O S.RAFI, 35 YEARS, R/O MAZEED STREET, KARVETINAGARAM VILLAGE, POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 24. S SHABEENA, D/O LATE S.GOWSUNNEE, W/O KHADAR BHASHA, 30 YEARS, RIO GUDIYATHAM ROAD, YADAMARRI VILLAGE POST AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 25. S MASTHANI, W/O LATE S.MASTHAN SAHEB, MUSLIM AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN - 517172 26. S KARISHMA, D/O LATE S.MASTHAN SAHEB, MUSLIM AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, STUDENT, RIO KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN - 517172 27. S MOULANA, D/O LATE S.MASTHAN SAHEB, MUSLIM AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, STUDENT, R/O KAMAVARAM KOTHAPETA VILLAGE AND POST, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN - 517172 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature a WRIT OF CERTIORARI calling for entire records connected to the Lok Adalat case No. 174/2018, Award dated 03.03.2018 in O.S.No.90 of 2010 passed by 2nd respondent irregularly in terms of compromise without knowledge of the petitioner and allotted to the petitioner share to an extent of Ac 0.13 cts out of Ac. 0.53 cts covered by Sy. 0.53 cts covered by Sy. No. 114/1 which was allotted to the petitioner in oral partition at the instance of the petitioner advocate, N.Madhu Sudhan Reddy in the Court below for his unlawful gain and he colluded with the defendants in the suit O.S.No.90 of 2010 filed by me for declaration of right and title and for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction and referred the said suit forcibly to Lok- Adalat and the petitioner advocate in the court below in collusion with the defendants fraudulently obtained award dated 03.03.2018 in Lok - Adalat Case No. 174/2018 in O.S.No.90 of 2010 with a fraudulent and malafide intention there by the petitioner advocate in the court below has done injustice to the petitioner and hence examine the same and set it aside by declaring the same as illegal, 5 irregular, irrational and violative of the Principles of Natural Justice and offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Award dated 03.03.2018 in Lok - Adalath Case No.174 of 2018 passed by the 2nd respondent and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to suspend the operation of Award dt. 03.03.2018 in Lok Adalat Case No. 174 of 2018 passed by 2nd respondent, Pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. I MUNNIRAJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY 2. GP FOR LAW LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS 6 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner herein had approached the Junior Civil Judge, Pakala, by way of O.S.No.90 of 2010, contending that he had been allotted Ac.0.13 cents of land, in Sy.No.114/1 of Kamavaram Kothapet Village, Pulicherla Mandal, Chittoor District, on an oral partition between himself and his brothers and that the brothers were seeking to dispossess him from the said land. 2. On 03.03.2018, the matter was referred as Lok-Adalat case No.174/18 and an award was passed by the Chairperson-cum-Junior Civil Judge, Mandal Legal Services Committee, JCJ Court buildings, Pakala, in which the land admeasuring Ac.0.13 cents is said to have been made into 15 plots and various parties were allotted. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition challenging the said award. It is the case of the petitioner that he was misled by his advocate and signed the documents without understanding the contents of the award. The petitioner has approached this Court nearly four years after the passing of the said award. This delay is sought to be explained by the petitioner by stating that the petitioner was going around the office of his advocate and was unable to obtain a pattadar passbook and the title deed as well as the certified copy of the award, as his counsel was requiring him to pay Rs.10,000/- as fees. The petitioner contends that he was able to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.10,000/- only in the year 2022 and thereafter approached this Court. 4. A perusal of the pleadings in the Writ Petition would make it clear that the petitioner does not dispute his signature in the award nor dispute the fact that he was present and had accepted the compromise, in front of the Lok-Adalat. The petitioner now contends that he was unaware of the contents of the award. This Court finds it difficult to believe such a contention. The fact that the petitioner had signed the award would itself show that the petitioner is aware that a compromise had been made. In such circumstances, it would be 7 difficult to believe that the petitioner is unaware of the terms of the compromise. 5. The delay in the filing of the Writ Petition is sought to be explained by simply stating that the petitioner was contacting his advocate from time to time for a certified copy of the Lok-Adalat award. It is difficult to believe that the petitioner, who squarely blames the advocate for allegedly forcing him into an unfair compromise, would continue to meet the said advocate and ask for a certified copy of the award. 6. A Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, in the case of Chaluvadi Murali Krishna & Anr Vs. District Legal Service Authority, Prakasam District & Ors 1 , while considering the scope of judicial review and challenging an award of the Lok- Adalat, had held as follows:- “Paragraph No.26:- Firstly, it is to be noted that the allegations made by the petitioners in this regard are categorically denied by the respondents. There cannot be any dispute that coercion and fraud are facts which lie in the factual arena and the same shall have to be established on the basis of evidence. A mere ipse dixit statement alleging coercion or fraud, however, strong it is, cannot find acceptance by a Court of Law, because assertions themselves do not constitute evidence. Further, a fact asserted by a party and denied by its opponent becomes a disputed question of fact and, therefore, the burden lies on the party to prove the said fact, which it has asserted as true.” 7. In the circumstances, we do not find any reason to interfere with the award of the Lok-Adalat and accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J. _________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J. Dated: 18.08.2025 BSM 1 2013 (1) ALD 320 (DB) 8 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR W.P.No.30876/2022 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Date: 18.08.2025 BSM