SAJANA GRANITES MADRAS Vs. MANDUVA SRINIVASA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiffs 1 and 2 in O.S.No.158 of 1992 on the file of the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge. Ongole, are the appellants. Appellants and A. Venkata Durgamba (hereinafter referred to as 3rd plaintiff) have filed the aforesaid O.S.No.158 of 1992 against respondents and five others for(i) a declaration that they (appellants) are the absolute owners of Ac.5.73 cents in S.No.55/6 of Rajupalem Lakshmipuram village within the boundaries mentioned in item No.1 of plaint schedule, and that 3rd plaintiff is the absolute owner of Ac.1.99 cents of land in S.No.55/6 of Rajupalem Lakshmipuram village within the boundaries mentioned in item No.2 of the plaint schedule; (ii) for a consequential permanent injunction restraining them Venkateswarlu died unmarried and intestate. Srinivasa Rao died leaving behind his wife Vaidehi as his legal heir. Satyanarayana died leaving behind his wife Adilakshmi and daughter Sukumari as his legal heirs. A. Venkata Ramanaiah, who is the son of 3rd plaintiff, is the General Power of Attorney of his mother 3rd plaintiff, Vaidehi, Adilakshmi and Sukumari. Since Mallaiah did not want a share, his sons Purushottam and Krishnaiah divided those properties equally under a registered family settlement-cum-partition deed dated 19-11-1919. Subsequently, Ramaswamy Sarma s/o. Purushottam filed O.S.No.183 of 1932 for partition of his share in the family property against his father, uncle Krishnaiah and others, in which a compromise decree was passed on 17-12-1937. Under the said partition Purushottam's branch and Krishnaiah's branch got Ac.112.50 cents each and Guda family got Ac.75.00 cents. As per the revenue records the extent of S.No.55 is Ac.300.00 cents; out of which Ac.2.23 cents in S.No.55/3-B was set apart for Nagarjunasagar Canal; Ac.18.90 cents in S.No.55/3-A and Ac.47.64 cents in S.No.55/3-C was surrendered by Lakshmi Narasamma w/o. Ramaswamy Sarma under Land Ceiling Act. Ac.37.70 cents in S.No.55/4 and Ac. 86.50 cents in S.No.55/5 was surrendered under the Land Ceiling Act by Guda family. Government acquired Ac.193.14 cents for Cattle breeding Centre. Thus only Ac.1-00 cents in S.No.55/1, Ac.6.00 cents in S.No.55/2, Ac.53.96 cents in S.No.55/4-B and Ac.45.90 cents in S.No.55/6 remained as per the revenue records. Guda family has no land in S.No.55. Yet respondents 3 and 4 filed a collusive suit in O.S.No.84 of 1992 seeking injunction against 1st respondent from interfering with their possession over the suit property. A. Venkata Ramanaiah as general power of attorney of 3rd plaintiff, Vaidehi, respondents 6 to 8 (defendants 10 to 12) from granting mining lease and other allied licences to respondents 1 to 5 and defendants 6 to 9 in respect of items 1 and 2 of the plaint schedule; (iii) for a permanent injunction restraining defendants 5 to 9 from carrying on mining operations in item No.2 of the plaint schedule till Item No.2 of the plaint schedule is sub-divided; (iv) for a permanent injunction restraining respondents 6 to 8 from granting transport and other licences to 9th defendant in respect of Ac.35.90 cents in S.No.55/6 till item No.2 of the plaint schedule is subdivided and (v) for a permanent injunction restraining respondents 9 and 10 i.e., defendants 13 and 14 from granting a 'no objection' certificate to the second respondent in respect of item No.1 of the plaint schedule. Subsequently, on the basis of a memo filed on behalf of the appellants and 3rd plaintiff that the claim with regard to item No.2 of the plaint schedule was adjusted out of Court, the suit in respect of item No.2 of the plaint schedule filed by 3rd plaintiff against defendants 5 to 9 was dismissed on 24-1-1996. Therefore the suit claim remained confined to appellants and respondents in relation to item No.l of the plaint schedule, which would hereinafter be referred to as the suit property.

(2.) The averments, in brief, in theamended plaint and rejoinder are, 'Sajana Granites' (shown as 1st appellant/1st plaintiff in the cause title) is a registered firm. The original owner of the suit property and other properties was Telikapalli Mallaiah, son of Pursuhottom. He had two sons by names Purushottam and Krishnaiah. As seen from the genealogy table of Telikapalli family, Purushottam had a son by name Ramaswamy Sarma. Krishnaiah had three sons and a daughter by names Satyanarayana, Srinivasa Rao, Venkateshwarlu and 3rd plaintiff. Out of Adilakshmi and Sukumari sold suit property to 'Sajana granites' under a registered sale deed dated 4-8-1992, and so "Sajana Granites" became the absolute owner of the suit property. Krishnaiah, predecessor in title of the vendors of 'Sajana granites', was given a patta by the Settlement Officer under the Estates Abolition Act, which became final. Since the said patta cannot be questioned in Civil Court, and since hone in the branch of Rama Krishnaiah, senior paternal uncle of Mallaiah, was given a share in Turupu Kandrika' or' Turpu Khandam' of which S.No.55 is a part, Arundhatamma, widow of Rama Krishnaiah, who is the grandson of Ramakrishnaiah, has no right in the suit property. Therefore, the sale dated 20-1-1992 in favour of 1st respondent executed by Arundhatamma does not create any right in favour of 1st respondent in the suit property. 1st respondent, is claiming to have sold Ac.3,00 cents from out of the land purchased under the sale deed dated 20-1-1992 to the 2nd respondent on 18-6-1992. Though respondents 1 and 2 have no right in the suit property they are trying to interfere with the possession of the appellants over the suit property and are trying to obtain mining leases therein. Hence the suit.

(3.) 1st respondent, who was initially set exparte, when had put in appearance later, was not permitted to file his written statement but was allowed to participate in the proceedings.