Telangana High Court Quashes Land Claims Based on Fabricated 1973 Stamp Paper
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has made it clear that no mutation or inflow of income obtained through cheating, fraud or fabricated documents can survive in the eyes of the law. Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka stated that “fraud spoils everything”, so such entries obtained through fraud will not be sustainable.
The judge was dealing with a petition filed in 2013 by Karri Koteshwar Rao and her posthumous legal representatives in respect of 14.09 acres of land in Survey Nos. 148/3 to 148/9 of the eponymous Chunchupalli village in Bhadradri-Kothagudem district. They purchased the land from Nagubandi Mallaiah through a sada bainama sale deed dated 14.04.1959, before Regulation 1 of the 1970 Act (total alienation of land in the Scheduled Area) came into force.
However, one Molothu Sreenu relied on forged and fabricated documents to claim ownership of the disputed land and submitted a sada sale deed dated 1973 and claimed that he was a member of the Lambada (Scheduled Tribe) community.
The controversy revolved around key documents produced by Sreenu before the appellate court; a “Deed of Sale” allegedly signed on March 29, 1973. However, the petitioners argued that the stamp paper itself revealed fraud as it bore the national slogan “Satyameva Jayate” along with the Ashoka Chakra emblem – features promoted by the Indian Security Press Nashik only on stamp papers printed from February 25 onwards. 1977. Obtained favorable orders from lower courts by relying on fabricated documents and committing fraud.
When the matter reached the Supreme Court, Justice Bheemapaka found that the allegation was of serious nature and observed that a document purportedly issued in 1973 could not contain a feature introduced a few years later that prima facie showed it to be a fabrication.
The court also examined the ‘pahani’ and ‘adangal’ records which showed that the land belonged to Sreenu’s father between 1973-76. However, the collector informed the court that there were no such records in the official archives.
The District Collector’s report also confirmed that there were no such entries in the revenue records for those years, which led the court to draw an adverse inference as to the documents relied on before the forgery was committed by the lower courts. The court also noted that the Lambadas were declared a Scheduled Tribe in 1976 under Article 342 of the Constitution, so the purchase of property by members of the Lambada community after the Ordinance came into force was not contrary to Article 3 of the Ordinance.
Despite interim stay orders issued by the Supreme Court, Sreenu sold plots of land in dispute to around 130 tribal people and constructions were carried out by them on the basis of sada bainama documents. The court found that Sreenu’s lawyer of record had made false statements on his behalf and cautioned the lawyer to be careful and diligent in making affidavits and presentations.
The court ordered correction of income records allegedly manipulated based on fabricated documents and observed that parties aggrieved by such fraud are free to initiate both civil and criminal proceedings against those responsible.
The court also reminded buyers that if the seller’s title collapses due to fraud, subsequent buyers cannot claim protection merely on the grounds that they purchased the property for consideration. The court observed that the only solution available to them was to sue their sellers for recovery of the sale price.
