(1.) The judgment, dtd. 22/6/2016 in O.S.No.29 of 2013, on the file of Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Vizianagaram ("Additional District Judge" for short), is under challenge in the present Appeal Suit filed by the unsuccessful first defendant.
(2.) The parties to this Appeal Suit will hereinafter be referred to as described before the learned Additional District Judge for the sake of convenience.
(3.) The case of the plaintiff, in brief, according to the averments in the plaint before the learned Additional District Judge, is that she is absolute owner of the RCC building property bearing D.No.12-10-3, Assessment No.1093023917, Plot No.60 in S.No.112/2 in Vizianagaram 2nd bit, Vizianagaram Municipality, Vizianagaram. She purchased the vacant site on 11/1/1983 from Guntuboyina China Suryanarayana and others by means of Registered Sale Deed No.55/1983, registered in Vizianagaram Sub-Registrar Office. Since the date of purchase, she was in possession and enjoyment of the same. She has one son i.e., the first defendant, Satya Ramendra Krishna, who is a permanent resident of Visakhapatnam. She has five daughters viz., Satyakala, Parvin, Bhagyalakshmi, Rohini and Phanimala. They are all well settled. They used to live separately from the plaintiff. The first defendant never looked after her at any time. Except the schedule property, plaintiff has no other property to live and to maintain herself. She is old aged and she has to meet her all livelihood needs. While so, her children including the first defendant used to quarrel with her on one pretext or the other to grab the schedule property from the plaintiff and also threatened her. The plaintiff approached the II Town Police Station on 21/8/2008 seeking police protection against her all children on a day of annual death function of her husband to be held on 13/9/2008. Police issued a receipt bearing No.375/2008, dtd. 21/8/2008. On coming to know that the first defendant came to Vizianagaram and made conspiracy with his friends, the plaintiff again approached the II Town Police on 10/10/2009 and made a report. II Town Police issued a receipt bearing No.587/2009, dtd. 10/10/2009. Even thereafter, the plaintiff has no good relations with the first defendant and her daughters. While so, taking advantage of the illiteracy and innocence of the plaintiff, the first defendant with the help of his wife Shanti @ Shanti Krishna and two others fraudulently misrepresented the plaintiff, as if the registered Sale Deed No.55/1983, dtd. 11/1/1983, was called upon by the SubRegistrar, Vizianagaram, for computerization of the said documents. While so, they fraudulently got the plaintiff's signatures and thumb marks and photos. Subsequently, on 30/3/2013 the plaintiff and her daughters were called by the S.I. of Police, II Town Police Station, Vizianagaram. On 31/3/2013 the plaintiff and one of her daughters by name Bhagya Lakshmi attended before S.I. of Police II Town Police Station, Vizianagaram. Then they came to know from the S.I. of Police that the first defendant lodged a report against the plaintiff that she is not giving possession though executed registered gift deed and that the plaintiff and her daughters are threatening the first defendant, as such, police protection is requested. On 31/3/2013 the first defendant did not attend before II Town Police Station, Vizianagaram. In his absence, the police conducted enquiry and recorded their statements. The plaintiff told the police that she never gave any gift in the shape of Rs.12,00,000.00 to the first defendant either on 9/4/2012 or subsequent to that date and she never gave any gift in the shape of cash of Rs.12,00,000.00 to the wife of the first defendant. The first defendant and his wife conspired themselves and made a fraudulent plan to grab cash of Rs.12,00,000.00 and they succeeded in their illegal attempt under which the wife of the first defendant through RTGS Transfer/SH231916, dtd. 9/4/2012 fraudulently transferred the money of plaintiff, which was kept in Andhra Bank bearing Account No.060910025701725 into the account of first defendant's wife. The first defendant represented before II Town Police that his mother gave gift of Rs.12,00,000.00 which is an illegal and fraudulent representation. The plaintiff reserved her right to file a separate suit for recovery of Rs.12,00,000.00 from first defendant and his wife. On 1/4/2013 the plaintiff made enquiry about the gift deed bearing No.1998/2012, dtd. 12/4/2012 before the Sub-Registrar Office, Vizianagaram and she came to know that the first defendant mortgaged the property to the second defendant for Rs.1,00,000.00 by executing a simple mortgage deed with the help of Registered Gift Deed bearing document No.1998/2012, dtd. 12/4/2012. The plaintiff did not deliver the possession of the property to the first defendant at any time. She is residing in the ground floor and she got household ration card to that effect. The plaintiff is paying house tax to the Vizianagaram Municipality for the schedule property. The gift deed alleged by the first defendant was obtained only by playing fraud and misrepresentation, as such, it is liable to be cancelled and the mortgage, if any, by the first defendant to the second defendant is not valid and binding on the plaintiff. The plaintiff is not aware of the contents of the gift deed. The first defendant took the illiteracy of the plaintiff as an advantage and obtained a fraudulent gift deed. Hence, the suit to cancel the gift deed.