SANKURI VENKATESH Vs. SANKURI RAMDAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are preferred against the judgment and decree in OS No. 364 of 1993 of the Court of the III Additional Judge, City Civil Courts, Secunderabad. CCCA No. 91 of 1996 is preferred by the 1st defendant whereas CCCA No. 210 of 2001 is preferred by the plaintiffs in the suit. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as plaintiffs and defendants.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the 2nd plaintiff is the wife, 1st plaintiff is the son and plaintiffs 3 to 5 are the daughters of late Sankuri Balaiah. It is the case of the plaintiffs that late Balaiah developed intimacy with one Chandramma since the year 1960 and both of them lived together as husband and wife. Late Balaiah provided maintenance as well as certain funds to Chadramma and she in turn invested them in the form of Fixed Deposits (FDs) in the 2nd defendant-bank. Two such FDs are dated 20-2-1992 and 28-4-1992 for an amount of Rs. 1,58,392-00 and Rs. 3,00,000.00respectively. Balaiah died on 12-11-1992 and Chandramma died on 25-9-1993. The nominations said to have been made by Chandramma in favour of the 1st defendant as regards the two FDs are tainted with misrepresentation and the said nominations are alleged to be not valid. Since Chandramma was the 2nd wife of Balaiah, the plaintiffs are the legal heirs to succeed to her estate. The suit was filed claiming the relief of a declaration that the plaintiffs are the legal heirs and successors and entitled to be paid the amounts belonging to the estate of Chandramma and permanent injunction against the 2nd defendant (Karnataka Bank) restraining it from paying or transferring the amounts covered by the said FDs.

(3.) The 1st defendant filed a written statement denying the averments in the plaint. It has been pleaded by the 1st defendant that late Chandramma had her own properties and she was never married to Balaiah and there was no relationship of wife and husband between them. It was the 1st defendant and his father that looked after Chandramma before her death and out of affection and gratitude for the service rendered to her, she nominated the 1st defendant to receive the amounts under the FDs. It is not necessary to refer to the pleadings in the written statement in minute details.