G BRAHAMANANDA RAO Vs. P VENKATACHALAPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 1st appellant before this Court is the plaintiff in O. S. No. 47 of 1974 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Gannavaram. Respondents 1 to 7 are the defendants in the said suit. Respondents 8 and 9 were brought on record as per the court order dated 31-12-1999 in C. M. P. No. 8763 of 1999.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 01-8-1956 directing the defendants to execute a sale-deed in his favour after receiving the balance of sale consideration and interest thereon and for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their followers from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property.

(3.) THE suit property consists of two items. Item No. 1 is 600 sq. yds. of vacant site situated in Krishnapuram Village and Item No. 2 is a vacant site of 170 sq. yds. with two tiled houses situated in Krishnapuram Village. According to the plaintiff, the 1st defendant executed an agreement of sale on 01-8-1956 in favour of the plaintiff on behalf of himself and on behalf of his minor sons i. e. , defendants 2 and 3. Defendants 4 and 5 are the sons born to the 1st defendant after 1-8-1956. At the time of agreement of sale, the plaintiff paid only Rs. 100/- and it was agreed under the agreement of sale that the plaintiff should pay the balance of sale consideration of Rs. 1900/- with interest @ 10 annas per month till the date of registration. The plaintiff further pleaded that the 1st defendant and himself agreed to extend the period of agreement for every three years and the period was extended up to 1974 by making endorsements on the reverse of the agreement by paying Rs. 100/- on 26-1-1957, Rs. 1,000/- on 1-5-1965, Rs. 2,000/- on 25-3-1968, and Rs. 5,000/- on 9-2-1971. The plaintiff pleads that he is in continuous possession and enjoyment of the suit sites and when the 7th defendant, a neighbour on eastern side tried to enter the suit site on 3-1-1974 he filed the above suit. 3. The 6th defendant filed a written statement with the following averments in brief: The averments of the plaint are not true. This defendant purchased the suit property from defendants 1 to 3 on 7-11-1959 under a registered sale-deed for a consideration of Rs. 1,000/- and since then he is in continuous possession of the same. On 6-12-1973 he sold away the said property to the 7th defendant under an agreement of sale dated 16-8-1973 and delivered possession of the same on receipt or Rs. 4,000/- towards sale consideration and also executed a registered sale-deed dated 3-1-1974. The 6th defendant further pleaded that the plaintiff was never in possession of the suit property, and the plaintiff in collusion brought the suit agreement into existence with the 1st defendant, after the 6th defendant executing the sale-deed in favour of the 7th defendant. He further pleaded that the plaintiff offered a higher amount and asked him to execute a sale-deed in his favour, but since he did not agree for the same, the plaintiff created the suit agreement and the endorsements thereon to defeat the interests of defendants 6 and 7. Hence the suit is liable to be dismissed with costs.