AJJAPALLLI PAPAIREDDY Vs. AJJAPALLI NARAYANAREDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 331 of 2003 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sangareddy against the judgment and decree dated 30-09-2009 passed in the said suit as confirmed by the Court of the Principal District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy by judgment and decree dated 23-06-2012 passed in A.S. No. 1 of 2010. This Second Appeal is heard and being disposed of at the stage of admission at the request of the counsel for either side. The appellants herein instituted the above said suit for cancellation of registered gift deed bearing document No. 2550/2002, dated 20-12-2002 in respect of the suit schedule lands and for perpetual injunction against the defendants and their men from interfering with the peaceful and lawful possession. The following are the plaint schedule properties.

(2.) For the sake of convenience, the parties, hereinafter, are referred to as arrayed in the suit.

(3.) The case of the plaintiffs, in brief, as per the plaint, is that the first plaintiff is the owner and possessor of agricultural lands admeasuring Ac. 7.15 gts. and Ac. 3.10 gts. situated in Sy.Nos 201 and 189 respectively of Mansanpally village, Munipally Mandal; the second plaintiff is the son of plaintiff No. 1 and he is the absolute owner of agricultural lands admeasuring Ac. 3.18 gts. in Sy. No. 190/1 of the same village; the said properties are suit schedule properties; the defendants 1 and 2 and one Venkat Reddy are the brothers of the first plaintiff; O.S. No. 23 of 1973 was filed for the relief of partition and separate possession, in which compromise was arrived at and items 1 and 2 of the plaint schedule fell to the share of plaintiff No. 1; item 3 of suit schedule was gifted by one Hanumantha Reddy by way of gift settlement deed in favour of second plaintiff; the plaintiffs are illiterates and were not worldly wise and the land of the first defendant is situated towards western side of the land of plaintiff No. 1 and the land of the 2nd plaintiff is situated towards southern side of the land of defendant No. 1; the plaintiffs and defendants decided to execute a document pertaining to a part of their lands for a cart-way, but the defendants themselves guided the plaintiffs with an intention to cheat them; recently the plaintiffs came to know that the defendants got the gift deed, said to have been executed by the plaintiffs in favour of the former, in respect of the lands bearing Sy. Nos. 201, 189 and 190/1, which is a void document; the second defendant joined the first defendant while executing the document and the defendants with ulterior motive created an impression that the signatures of the plaintiffs were obtained as witnesses to that document; the gift was not accepted by the donee and hence the same is a void document and the plaintiffs did not deliver possession of the lands admeasuring Ac. 0.07 gts. Ac. 0.02 gts. And Ac. 0.01 gts. lying in Sy. Nos. 201, 189 and 190/1 respectively in favour of the defendants and the plaintiffs have been in possession of the said lands and the defendants tried to interfere with the peaceful and lawful possession of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule property on 15-07-2003 and threatened to dispossess them from the suit schedule lands.