GANGOJI RAO Vs. H K CHANNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by plaintiff 1 and 2 is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18-1-1975 passed by the District Judge, Kolar, in Regular Appeal No. 47 of 1974, on his file, dismissing the appeal on confirming the judgment and decree dated 29-9-1969 passed by the Munsiff, Chikballapur, in Original Suit No. 89 of 1966, on his file, dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs.

(2.) The plaintiffs instituted a suit for declaration of their title to the suit property and for possession of the same from the defendant with past mesne profits of Rs. 300/- and future mesne profits to be determined by the Court.

(3.) One Krishnoji, Rao, great-grandfather of appellant-1 and grandfather appellant-2, had two sons by name Annoji Rao and Pilla Santoji. Annoji Rao died in the year 1954 leaving behind him his widow Makkayyamma and his four children by name Venkoji Rao, Venkatamma, Vellu Bai and Narayana Rao (appellant-2). Venkoji Rao, the eldest son, also died in the year 1955, leaving behind him his widow Akkayyamma and a child by name Gangoji Rao (appellant-1). The suit property was the ancestral property belonging to the joint family of the two plaintiffs. Akkayyamma and Makkayyamma, jointly sold the suit property to the defendant under a registered sale deed dated 29-9-1960, as guardians of the minor plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs, the said Akkayyamma and Makkayamma were not their guardians at any time. The appellants were under the care and protection of their relative Narasinga Rao. Therefore, they contended that the said sale was neither necessary nor beneficial to the family and that Akkayyamma and Makkayyamma had no right to sell the suit property without the permission of the District Judge. They further submitted that the defendant did not, therefore, acquire any title, right or interest in the suit property, by virtue of the said sale, which was void. Hence, they instituted the suit for declaration of their title and for possession of the suit property with past and future mense profits as also the costs of the suit.