IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 975 OF 2014 Between:
Cheppali Subbarayudu … Appellant/Respondent V/s.
The Asst.Commissioner of Endowments Department & Anr. … Respondents/Petitioners Counsel for Appellant : Sri Harender Pershad Counsel for Respondents : None appeared The court made the following : [judgment follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 975 OF 2014 JUDGMENT :
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred against orders of A.P. Endowments Tribunal, Hyderabad, dated 12/08/2014 in OA.No. 696 of 2013.
2. The appellant herein is respondent in the above referred O.A. and the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments Department, Kadapa filed the above referred O.A. under section 83 of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions Act [for brevity ‘The Act’] for removal of encroachment and the Tribunal issued notice to the appellant herein and he having received the notice got filed vakalath through his counsel but inspite of opportunities given to him, he failed to file his counter and utilise the opportunity within ninety days period, and therefore, Tribunal set him ex- parte and examined the second petitioner as PW-1 and marked Exs.P-1 to P-7 and on a consideration of evidence of PW-1 and documents Exs.P-1 to P-7 allowed the application and ordered for eviction of appellant herein. Now the appellant preferred this civil miscellaneous appeal aggrieved by orders of Tribunal dated 12/08/2014.
3. Heard counsel for the appellant.
4. Admittedly, no application is filed before Tribunal to set aside ex-parte order as contemplated under Rule 11 [3] of A.P. Endowments Tribunal Rules 2009 [for brevity ‘The Rules’]. Advocate for appellant submitted that appellant has got two remedies; one is to approach the Tribunal and the other is to file appeal under section 84 [2] of the Act.
5. Now as seen from the material, ex-parte order is passed for not filing the counter and now the objection of appellant is that there is a cloud over the title of second respondent and the Tribunal without looking into it passed the impugned order. Now in this civil miscellaneous appeal title aspect cannot be decided because this plea was not raised before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has no occasion to consider the same.
6. Having considered the facts of the case and the contentions of appellant, I feel that by directing the appellant to approach the Tribunal by invoking Rule 11 of the Rules, by filing application to set aside ex-parte order passed against him and pursue his remedy and by directing the Tribunal to consider the said application and receive counter in the main O.A. and decide the matter on merits without reference to any limitation aspect, this appeal can be disposed of.
7. Accordingly, appeal is disposed of at admission stage giving liberty to appellant to file application in accordance with Rule 11 [3] of the Rules within thirty days from this day and till then he shall not be evicted in pursuance of the order dated 12/08/2014. If the appellant failed to invoke his remedy under Rule 11 [3] of the Rules within the above stipulated time, the order dated 12/08/2014 holds good.
8. With the above direction, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of. No costs.
9. As a sequel, miscellaneous petition if any, pending in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal shall stand closed.
JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR .
06/11/2014
I s L
N B : Issue CC in three days
B/o. I s L
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 975 OF 2014 Circulation No. Date: 06/11/2014 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 43 NB: Furnish CC in three days