APHC010495952024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 25683/2024 Between: 1. KUNCHEPU NAGALAKSHI,, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/O KUNCHEPU VENKATA RAMANA, R/O D.NO. 1/1125-K1, ADAPALA STREET, KADIRI, KADIRI MUNICIPALITY, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 2. KUNCHEPU SANKAR,, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O KUNCHEPU VENKATA RAMANA, R/O D.NO. 1/1125-K1, ADAPALA STREET, KADIRI, KADIRI MUNICIPALITY, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 3. KUNCHEPU RAMESH,, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O KUNCHEPU VENKATA RAMANA, R/O D.NO. 1/1125-K1, ADAPALA STREET, KADIRI, KADIRI MUNICIPALITY, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT 4. VALLEPU RADHA DEVI,, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS W/O NAGENDRA, R/O D.NO. 1/1125-K1, ADAPALA STREET, KADIRI, KADIRI MUNICIPALITY, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE LOK ADAATHE LOK ADALAT BENCH LAT BENCH, MANDAL LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, KADIRI, REP. BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICER, KADIRI. PRESENTLY SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPRTHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, 2 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 PUTTAPRTHI. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, 4. THE TAHSILDAR, OBULA DEVARA CHERUVU MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 5. PALLAPU SIVAMMA, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, W/O SREERAMULU, R/O DOOR. NO. 10/726, NAGARAJU STREET, VALISAB ROAD, KADIRI TOWN AND MANDAL SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 6. KUNCHAPU ESWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, S/O GANGULAPPA @ PEDDA GANGULAPPA, RESIDENT AT ADAPALA STREET, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 7. KUNCHAPU VENKATA MADHAVI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS W/O M. RAMA KRISHNA, D/O K. LAKSHMI NARAYANA, R/O DOOR. NO. 1/1205, Y.M. PALLI VEEDHI, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 8. KUNCHAPU VENKATA NEERAJA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, W/O B. SURESH KUMAR, D/O K. LAKSHMI NARAYANA, R/O DOOR. NO. 7/471, BHGAYA NAGAR, CHINNA CHOWK, KDAAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 9. KUNCHAPU RAMA CHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O GANGULAPPA @ PEDDA GANGULAPPA, RESIDENT AT RODDAM, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 10. KUNCHAPU RAJA SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, S/O GANGULAPPA @ PEDDA GANGULAPPA, RESIDENT AT RODDAM, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 11. KUNCHAPU VASANTHA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, S/O GANGULAPPA @ PEDDA GANGULAPPA, RESIDENT AT KUMMARAVANDLAPALLE, KADIRI MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 12. KUNCHAPU DEVI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, W/O KUNCHAPAU BALARAJU, RESIDENT AT MITTAPALLI CROSS, H/O INGALURU, O.D. CHERUVU MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 3 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 13. KUNCHAPU LOKESH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, S/O LATE KUNCHAPAU BALARAJU, MENTALLY AND PHYSICALLY INFIRM, REP. BY HIS MOTHER KUNCHEPU DEVI RESIDENT AT MITTAPALLI CROSS, H/O INGALURU, O.D. CHERUVU MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. 14. KUNCHAPU MEENA KUMARI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, W/O SREENATH, D/O KUNCHEPU BALARAJU, RESIDENT AT ROAD, NEAR NADIMIVANKA, ANANTAPUR TOWN, 15. DERANGULA ADI LAKSHMAMMA RAZIYA BEE, AGED 52 YRS, W/O MAHABOOB BASHA, R/O DOOR. NO. 13-302, MITTAPALLI , H/O INGALURU, O.D CHERUVU MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT. ...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the award dt 9-12-2023 passed by the 1st respondent Lok Adalat Bench at Kadiri in O.S.No. 680 of 2022 on the file of AddI Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri in connection with the property to an extent of Ac. 11.62 cents in Sy No. 777, Inagaluru Village, O.D. Cheruvu Mandal, Sri Saty Sai District as the same is illegal, improper and void besides violation of petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently quash the same as the same is obtained by playing fraud and misrepresentation by the respondents no. 5 to 15 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to dispense with the filing of the Certified Copy of the award dt 9-12-2023 passed by the 1®‘ respondent Lok Adalat Bench at Kadiri in O.S. No. 680 of 2022 on the file of AddI Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents no. 2 to 4 not to make any 4 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 mutations in the revenue records in the name of the respondents no. 5 to 15 for the subject land to an extent of Ac. 11.62 Cents in Sy No. 777, Inagaluru Village, O.D. Cheruvu Mandal, Sri Saty Sai District and pass IA NO: 3 OF 2024 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 may be pleased to suspend the operation of the award dt 9-12-2023 passed by the 1 respondent Lok Adalat Bench at Kadiri in O.S. No. 680 of 2022 on the file of AddI Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. HARISH KUMAR RASINENI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE 2. V BABY RANI 3. S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY 5 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The impugned Award relates to the property of late Sri Pedda Gangulappa, who had purchased an extent of Ac.11-62 cents of land, in Sy.No.777 of Inagaluru Revenue Village, O.D. Cheruvu Mandal, Sri Satyasai District. After the demise of late Sri Pedda Gangulappa, six of his sons, had filed O.S.No.61 of 2010, before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri against another son and two others, for partition of the said property and for the parties being put in separate exclusive possession of the land that would be allotted to them. The 3rd defendant, in the Suit, is the 15th respondent herein. It appears that, the 15th respondent, had been impleaded as the 3rd defendant, in O.S.No.61 of 2010, on the ground that, she was the daughter of the original owner, who had mortgaged the said property to late Sri Pedda Gangulappa, and had subsequently, sold the same to late Sri Pedda Gangulappa. 2. A preliminary decree, dated 30.08.2010, was passed, in O.S.No.61 of 2010, dividing the suit schedule property into eight equal shares, out of which, six (06) equal shares were being allotted to each of the plaintiffs. Subsequently, I.A.No.54 of 2021, was filed by the plaintiffs therein, for a final decree to be drawn up. 3. While, these proceedings were pending, the 5th respondent herein, who is a daughter of late Sri Pedda Gangulappa, moved a separate Suit bearing O.S.No.680 of 2022, before the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri for a declaration of title over an extent of Ac.1-22 cents of land out of the said 6 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 Ac.11-62 cents of land. In this Suit, plaintiffs 1, 2 & 4 to 6 in O.S.No.61 of 2010 and their legal heirs were defendants 1 to 9. The 15th respondent herein, who was arrayed as the 3rd defendant in O.S.No.61 of 2010, was arrayed as the 10th defendant. However, the petitioners, who are the legal heirs of plaintiff No.3, in O.S.No.61 of 2010, were not impleaded as defendants in the Suit. After the filing of the Suit, the parties had entered into a compromise, which was recorded as an Award, dated 09.12.2023, in O.S.No.680 of 2022 by the Lok Adalat Bench, at Kadiri. 4. The petitioners, who are the legal heirs of the plaintiff No.3, in O.S.No.61 of 2010, have moved the present Writ Petition, challenging the said Award, on the ground of fraud and suppression of fact. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that, the respondents 5 to 15, had conspired to denude the rights of the petitioners. It is contended that, the 15th respondent, is the main beneficiary of the impugned Award in as much as she is allotted about an extent of Ac.3-58 cents of land out of the entire extent of Ac.11-62 cents of land and that, the petitioners share appears to have been allotted to the 15th respondent. 6. Sri Harish Kumar Rasineni, learned counsel for the petitioners, would contend that, the entire exercise resulting in the impugned Award, is a malafide exercise, done to ensure that the petitioners are deprived of their right and title over the land that would be allotted to them, by virtue of the preliminary decree, dated 30.08.2010, in O.S.No.61 of 2010 passed by the 7 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 learned Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri. He would submit that, the 5th respondent, has been set up by the other respondents solely for the purposes of a new litigation where the petitioners could be excluded from the division of the land. He would also submit that, the share of the petitioners, has been determined by the preliminary decree, in O.S.No.61 of 2010 and the same cannot be disturbed in as much as the preliminary decree has become final and no Appeal has been filed. 7. Smt. V. Baby Rani, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 to 15, would contend that, the 5th respondent has a separate share, in the property and the Suit had been filed for the purpose of indicating her right over the property as the daughter of late Sri Pedda Gangulappa. She would also contend that, the arrangement between the parties had been done, on the basis of the respective claims of the parties and there is no illegality, in the Award, passed by the Lok Adalat. 8. A perusal of the preliminary decree, in O.S.No.61 of 2010, produced before this Court, in which the respondents 6 to 15 are parties, would show that, the defendant No.3 in O.S.No.61 of 2010, through whom the petitioners are claiming their land, had been allotted a 1/8th share, in the entire property. 9. In those circumstances, the respondents 6 to 14 as well as the 15th respondent, remaining silent about the pendency of O.S.No.61 of 2010 and the pendency of the final decree proceedings in this Suit, would clearly amount to suppression of fact. The said suppression of fact, appears, on the 8 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 face of the record, to be an attempt to create fresh rights over the property, to the detriment of the petitioners. Such actions would amount to fraud. 10. In these circumstances, it would only be appropriate to set aside the said Award and leaving it open to the parties to agitate their rights, in the appropriate Forum. 11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 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 Date:01.12.2025 KPV 9 RRR,J & TCDS,J W.P.No.25683 of 2024 187 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION No.25683 of 2024 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) 01.12.2025 KPV