BODLA RAVINDRANATH Vs. CHINTALA VENKATA LAXMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :The second defendant is the appellant. The plaintiff, first respondent herein filed a suit for declaration that she is the only heir, successor and owner of the suit schedule property - double storied building bearing Municipal Nos.l5-2-314 and 315 situated at Kishangunj, Hyderabad. According to her she is the only legal heir entitled to succession of the said suit schedule property. The property originally belong to one Bodla Raghavulu. He died some time in 1932. His wife, Bodla Jejamma became the sole heir and was enjoying property. Raghavulu and Jejamma had one daughter by name Venkatamma, who predeceased Jejamma. Venkatamma's daughter Sulochana was married to first defendant/ second respondent-Kashinath and they had only daughter Chintala Venkatalaxmi who is the plaintiff. Sulochana also died leaving behind her the plaintiff. Kashinalh married Danamma again and through her he got two sons and one daughter. Bodla Ravindranath is eldest son and he is arrayed as second defendant, who is appellant in the appeal.

(2.) In a nutshell it is plaintiff 's case that after death of Jejamma on 23.12.1977 first defendant Kashinath occupied the house forcibly and appropriated all the movables, gold, jewellery and valuables. When the plaintiff tried to take possession of the house and movables, the first defendant dodged the issue on one pretext or the other. The plaintiff issued Lawyer's notice dated 23.3.1981. The first defendant set up a false plea of adoption of the second defendant by late Jejamma and Will deed of Jejamma bequeathing suit schedule property in favour of her adopted son. Asserting that late Jejamma never adopted the second defendant and she never executed any Will, she filed the suit that she is sole heir and owner of the suit schedule property. Defendants 1 and 2 contested the suit and defendants 3 to 6 who are the tenants in the suit schedule property remained ex parts.

(3.) It is the case of the first defendant that Jejamma was deeply religious minded lady and she wanted male issue in her family to avoid Punnamanarakam. It is she who had persuaded the first.defendant to marry second time. Since birth of the second defendant Jejamma was very fond of him and treated second defendant as her own son with an intention to adopt. At the time of marriage of plaintiff in April 1968, late Jejamma executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs.4,000/- in respect of the building bearing Nos. 15-2-316 to 319 situated at Kishangunj, Hyderabad which is adjacent to the suit building. No consideration was in fact paid. But the first defendant got the document executed in favour of Venkatalaxmi out of affection for the issues of both wives. The plaintiff has already got one building of late Jejamma which is of similar value to the suit property. Late Jejamma lived with the family members of the first defendant in the suit house. She adopted second defendant on 11.5.1977 and also performed thread ceremony as per Hindu rites. The plaintiff and her husband and other relatives were present. Late Jejamma executed Will on 12.5.1977 with sound and disposing state of mind bequeathing all her properties to second defendant. She died in the suit house while living with the defendants on 23.12.1977. The second defendant as adopted son performed funeral rites of late Jejamma. Late Jejamma did not leave any gold or silver articles as the same were stolen in 1974. In spite of complaint to police, they could not be recovered. The second defendant as adopted son of late Jejamma and also by virtue of the Will dated 12.5.1977 inherited all the properties. The plaintiff is not entitled to any relief of declaration and for recovery of possession and that the suit is barred by limitation. The written statement filed by the second defendant/appellant herein is to the same effect and it is not necessary again to summarise the same. The Trial Court has settled the following issues stemming from the pleadings.