Summary
The Court corrected the conflation of two Hyderabad survey properties. The appellants’ claim in Survey No. 129/45/D was distinct from the State’s Survey No. 403 land involved in earlier litigation and the publication-house allotment. It restored the Single Judge’s directions in the specified writ petitions. A separate connected appeal was dismissed because the earlier judgment left nothing surviving in it.
Issues
- Whether the Division Bench wrongly treated the distinct survey properties as one.
- What relief followed for the specified land claims and connected appeal.
Held
- The appellants’ title was traced to the compromise decree and ensuing sale deed in Survey No. 129/45/D. The findings excluding evacuee proceedings for that property were not displaced by litigation concerning Survey No. 403. (¶ 8–12)
- The Division Bench had mixed up the two properties. Its order was set aside and the Single Judge’s directions in Writ Petition Nos. 18353 and 26478 of 2006 restored, including the survey-based protections quoted in the judgment. (¶ 9–14)
- Civil Appeal No. 5441 of 2015 separately failed because nothing survived after the 9 August 2017 judgment in the related appeals. (¶ 1–2)
Result
Civil Appeal No. 5441 of 2015 dismissed; Civil Appeal Nos. 5442–5456 of 2015 allowed on the stated terms, restoring the specified Single Judge directions.