UPPULURI KOTESWARA REDDY Vs. MOGULLURI INDIRA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1st respondent herein filed O.S.No.162 of 1993 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Giddalur against the appellants and respondents 2 and 3 initially for the relief of declaration of title and perpetual injunction in respect of the suit schedule property i.e., an extent of Ac.4.16 cents of land in Survey No.96/1 of Vondutla Village, Besthavaripet Mandal, Prakasam District. According to her, the property was purchased from the 2nd respondent, through a sale deed, dated 11.08.1983 (Ex.A.1) and that ever since then, she is in possession and enjoyment of the property. The cause of action for filing of suit is said to be the interference by appellants 1 and 2 (defendants 1 and 4) and respondents 2 and 3 (defendants 2 and 3) with her possession and enjoyment of the property.

(2.) Separate written statements were filed by the 1st appellant and 2nd respondent and a common written statement, by the 2nd appellant and 3rd respondent. The gist of their contention was that the 2nd respondent is the owner of the suit schedule property and certain other items and that he executed the sale deed-Ex.A.1 in favour of the 1st respondent, being under the impression that he was selling an extent of Ac.3.62 cents of land in Survey No.37/2 of the Village. It was urged that the father-in-law of the 1st respondent played fraud upon the 2nd respondent by inserting the particulars of another piece of land viz., Ac.4.16 cents in Survey No.96/1. It was also their case that in respect of the suit schedule property, there existed an agreement of sale, dated 04.01.1983 (Ex.B8) in favour of the 1st appellant and that the resultant sale deed was executed on 29.08.1992 (Ex.B.1) by the 2nd respondent.

(3.) During the pendency of the suit, the 1st respondent filed an application to permit her to amend the prayer in the suit to claim the alternative relief of recovery of possession, in case her plea as to possession over the property is not accepted. It was ordered.