DUDDUMPUDI VENKATARAYUDU Vs. DUDDUMPUDI RAJAGOPAL ALIAS TATABBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole defendant in O.S. No. 108 of 2002 is the appellant in this second appeal. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to, as arrayed in the suit.

(2.) The 2nd plaintiff is the mother of the 1st plaintiff and the defendant. The suit was filed for the relief of declaration of title in respect of the suit schedule property and for recovery of possession by evicting the defendant there from. Alternatively, it was pleaded that if any construction in the schedule property is found to have been removed, then, a sum of Rs. 50,000/-be awarded towards value of the removed construction in addition to the recovery of possession. Prohibitory injunction to restrain the defendant from making any construction thereon or from interfering in any manner over the plaint schedule property after possession thereof is delivered to the 1st plaintiff and mandatory injunction directing him to remove new constructions if any made; were also claimed.

(3.) It was pleaded that the suit schedule property was purchased by the 2nd plaintiff through a sale deed, dated 16-11-1981 (marked as Ex.A1) and that with her permission, her elder son, the defendant, was living therein. The 2nd plaintiff is stated to have executed through her GPA, a gift deed on 06-03-2000 (marked as Ex.A-2) in respect of the suit schedule property, in favour of the 1st plaintiff and that through another document, dated 18-03-1998, she gifted the vacant site of 121 sq.yds., to the defendant. During the lifetime of their father, the 1st plaintiff and the defendants are said to have partitioned all the joint family properties, except the family house and a site and that they were said to have been partitioned under a partition deed.