UNDAVILLI NAGARATHNAM Vs. REDDI SATYANARAYANA MURTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal on certificate from the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

(2.) The two plaintiffs in the original suit are the appellants. They brought a suit in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Rajahmundry, for evicting defendants 1 to 3 from the properties in Schedules A, B and C, for delivery of possession of A and C Schedule properties to the first plaintiff and of the B Schedule properties either to the first plaintiff or to the second plaintiff. The suit properties were owned and possessed by Meenavalli Subbarayudu of Vedurupaka (hereinafter to be described as Subbarayudu). Subbarayudu was the husband of the second plaintiff and father of the first plaintiff. He had no male issue. He had only two daughters, plaintiff No. 1 and defendant No. 4, who was the older of the two. Subbarayudu made various dispositions of his property by executing several documents during his lifetime in favour of his daughters. So did his wife, the second plaintiff. While making such dispositions he was careful enough to make provision for himself and for his wife during their lifetime. The fourth defendant was married in 1923 and defendant No. 1 is her son. The first plaintiff was married in 1935. After the marriage of the first plaintiff the mother executed a deed of gift (Ex. B-6) on February 13, 1935 in her favour in respect of certain land. On the same day her father also executed in her favour a deed of gift (Ex. B-7) in respect of some other land. On 7-6-1935, Subbarayudu executed another deed of gift in favour of his first daughter, defendant No. 4, giving her also some land (Ex. B-8). All the three documents were registered on the same day, namely, on June 11, 1935. After about nine years the mother executed a settlement deed (Ex. B-5) dated June 7, 1944, in respect of her joint 1/3 share in certain property in favour of her two daughters to be shared by them equally reserving life interest for herself. Then followed a settlement deed (Ex. A-4) of January 8, 1950, executed by Subbarayudu in favour of the first plaintiff giving her ten acres of pasture land as mentioned in C Schedule. Subbarayudu further executed a registered deed dated January 23, 1950 (Ex. A-8), described as will, whereby he gave to his daughters all the properties barring a few mentioned therein and stating that after his own lifetime and after the lifetime of his wife all his movable and immovable properties would be taken in equal shares by his two daughters. On April 14, 1955, he executed a settlement deed (Ex. A-1) whereunder he gave A and B Schedule properties to the first plaintiff his second daughter. By this document the A Schedule property was to be enjoyed by the first plaintiff after his lifetime and B Schedule property after the lifetime of her parents. Three years later on August 4, 1958, Subbarayudu executed four more documents including a deed of revocation. Ex. B-10 is the document by which the earlier document Ex. A-1 was revoked stating that the earlier one had been brought about by fraud and misrepresentation. Ex. B-11 was executed purporting to settle his property on both the daughters to be enjoyed in equal shares after the lifetime of their parents, Ex. B-12 was executed in favour of his wife and the elder daughter giving them a certain extent of the land in Mellore village besides the house sites and houses in Vedurupaka. It was mentioned in Ex. B-12 that after his lifetime his wife would be in possession without powers of alienation and that thereafter the elder daughter would be entitled to possession and enjoyment of the property as an absolute owner Ex. B-13 was executed in favour of the first defendant, namely, grandson of Subbarayudu through his first daughter, giving him possession of the properties in which he had life interest stipulating at the same time that he (the first defendant) should deliver forty bags of paddy and obtain receipt from him every year during his lifetime.

(3.) The plaintiffs' case is that Subbarayudu had leased out A and B Schedule properties mentioned in Ex. A-1 on August 16, 1958, to the third defendant, the son of the second defendant and that both these defendants were in possession of the properties as tenants from that time. Subbarayadu died on May 5 1960. After his death plaintiffs 1Rs. and 2 basing their claim on Ex. A-1 respectively gave notices to the third defendant on June 14, 1960 and on July 11, 1960, to deliver back the lands in their possession. The third defendant replied that he was only working as a farm servant under the first defendant and the latter was the lessee under a deed dated August 4, 1958 and that the settlement deed in favour of the plaintiffs had been revoked by late Subbarayudu. The first plaintiff also had trouble with the first defendant when the latter drove away his watchman and lodged a complaint with the police claiming that he was in possession of the lands. The first plaintiff thereupon sent a notice on August 20, 1960, to the first defendant who, on the other hand, asserted his rights in the land under a deed of settlement (Ex. B-13) dated August 4, 1958. That led to the institution of the present suit by the plaintiffs out of which this appeal has arisen.