Summary: A court has thrown out a case challenging a Lok Adalat decision from 2012. The people who brought the case, Aytha Nagender and T Sujatha, said there was cheating involved in a land sale from 2007. The case was dismissed because they took too long to bring it up and didn't have enough proof.
Back in 2007, Aytha Nagender and T Sujatha bought some land from Kodicherla Narshima Chary, who is the father of the people they were up against in court: Kodicherla Raghunath Chary, Kodicherla Ranga Chary, Kodicherla Sesha Chary, and Kodicherla Shima Chary. But in 2012, a Lok Adalat decision, which was based on an agreement between the seller and his son, changed things about this land. Aytha Nagender and T Sujatha said this was done in a sneaky way.
"The people who brought the case say they bought a piece of land from the father of the people they were against in court through a signed Sale Deed dated 14.03.2007."
Aytha Nagender and T Sujatha challenged the Lok Adalat decision because they believed there was cheating and important facts were hidden. They argued that Kodicherla Narshima Chary, who sold them the land, didn't tell the court about this sale when he made a deal with his son.
"The decision clearly shows that both sides filed a Joint Memo... and agreed to it."
The people who brought the case filed it in 2024, a whole 12 years after the Lok Adalat decision. They said they only found out about the problem in April 2024 when they saw the land being used as a road.
"The reason for the 12-year delay is... the person who had the power to act for the petitioners only found out on 15.04.2024 that the land... was being used by the respondent No.4 as a road."
The court, led by Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar, didn't find any good reason in Aytha Nagender and T Sujatha's claims. The court pointed out that there was no proof of cheating and that they took too long to bring the case.
"The case of the people who brought it, along with the very long delay, is further weakened by them not being directly involved in the original case."
In the end, the court dismissed the case and suggested that if the people bringing the case want to prove cheating, they should do so in a civil court.
"We accordingly do not find any merit in the Writ Petition."
This case shows how important it is to act quickly and have strong evidence when trying to challenge legal decisions.
