A.VENKATAPPA(DIED) Vs. AVULA VENKATAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs in O.S.No.5 of 1993 on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Madanapalle are the appellants, and the respondents are the defendants in the suit. Originally, the suit was instituted by the 1st plaintiff Mr.A.Venkatappa against the defendants, seeking relief of declaration of title in respect of plaint schedule property, and for permanent injunction. During pendency of the suit, the 1st plaintiff died, and then the appellant Nos.2 and 3 were added as plaintiffs being the legal representatives of the 1st plaintiff, who continued the suit.

(2.) The appellants and the respondents hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs and defendants as arrayed before the trial Court.

(3.) The plaintiffs instituted the suit against the defendants, seeking relief of declaration of their title in respect of plaint schedule property, and for permanent injunction. The plaint schedule property is an agricultural land to an extent of Ac.0.57 cents, which is shown in the plaint is extracted hereunder: SCHEDULE Chittoor District, Madanapalle Sub-District lands at Ramireddigaripalle, S.No.21/3, 0-57 cents, out of 1-18 cents, bounded on: East : Land of defendants and Reddeppa; South : Gangarappa Vimaladevi; West : G.Vimala Devi; North : Land of plaintiff. After sub-division 21/3A. It is the contention of the plaintiffs that the plaint schedule property originally belongs to two brothers, namely Mr.Avula Dasanna Gowdu and Mr.Naganna Gowdu, sons of Ellappa Gowdu. The plaintiffs submit that both brothers got divided the plaint schedule property and in the division the plaint schedule property fell to the share of Mr.Naganna Gowdu, father of the 1st plaintiff about 70 or 75 years back. Since the date of division, the father of the 1st plaintiff had been in possession of the plaint schedule property during his life time, and thereafter the 1st plaintiff continued to be in possession of the plaint schedule property and perfected his title by way of adverse possession and ouster of defendants as he was having been in possession of the same openly, peacefully and uninterruptedly over the period of seven decades. It is also the contention of the plaintiffs that said Mr.Dasanna Gowdu died, leaving behind him his two sons by name Mr.Gangulappa, who died leaving behind him his wife/1st defendant and two sons by name Mr.Venkatramana/2nd defendant and Mr.Venkataswamy, who is no more. They submit that Mr.Venkatramana/2nd defendant and Mr.Venkataswamy got divided their portion of the properties, which is situated adjacent to the plaint schedule property on eastern side, which fell to the share of Mr.Venkataswamy. They also submit that taking into consideration of their long possession and enjoyment, the land also sub-divided and the plaint schedule property was sub-divided as S.No.21/3A and the land of the defendants as S. No.21/3C, but sub-division is not reflected in 10(1) account maintained by the Revenue authorities. The plaintiffs alleged that with a view to develop his lands, he dug bore-well in the plaint schedule property, which got good spring, wherein the defendants have demanded to give share, for which they refused, due to that they sent letters to Revenue authorities and Bank claiming title in the plaint schedule property, where bore-well was sunk. Hence, suit is filed for declaration of their title and for permanent injunction.