KATTA RATTAMMA Vs. GANNAMANENI KOTAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiffs' suit O.S. No. 232 of 1963- for declaration of their title to the suit lands and for permanent injunction, was dismissed by the District Munsif Narasaraopet and appeal A.S.No. 154 of 1970, against the judgment and decree of the trial court, was also dismissed by the first appellate Court. Hence this second appeal by the plaintiff.

(2.) The material facts are:-Plaintiffs purchased Ac. 8. 05 cents out of Ac.9-53 cents of land, comprised in Demarcation Nos.546/1 and 553, situated at Poonur village for Rs, I000/-from defendant No. 3, Meka Rosaiah, under a registered sale- deed dated 27-8-1962 (Ex.A.I). Ever since the date of purchase, plaintiffs have been in possession and enjoyment of the said lands. Defendant No. I is a rich and powerful man. He has been trying to Interefere with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said lands. Four days before the institution of the suit, when the plaintiffs were act- ully ploughing the lands by engaging their caste men, the defendants obstructed the plaintiffs and threatened them and their men. With those averments, the plaintiffs filed the above suit.

(3.) Defendant No. 2 filed a written statement, which v;as adopted by defendant No. I. The 2nd defendant contended that the sale-deed in favour of the plaintiffs is a sham and nominal document brought about by defendant No. 3 who is closely related to the plaintiffs. The 2nd defendant purchased Ac. 3.30 cents of land, in Demarcation No. 546/1 and Ac. 4,20 cents in D.No 552/1 from Meka Rosaiah, defendant No. 3, under an agreement of sale dated 10-5-1950 for a consideration of Rs. 5,000/- and took delivery of the same on the date of the agreement. Since the 2nd defendant has been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said lands, in his ow_p right and teethe knowledge of one and all, defendant No. 3 executed a registered sale-deed in favour of defendant No. 2 on 12-12-1952 (Ex.B2). Out of the said Ac. 3,30 cents in D.No, 546/1, the 2nd defendant sold 0.25 cents of land to one Chukkapalli Seshamma, under a registered sale-deed, dated 14-10-1956 (Ex.B.6) Chukkapalh Seshamma la a necessary party and the suit was bad for non-joinder of a necessary party. The remaining portion of the land was in his personal cultivation or under the cultivation of a tenant to whom he had given on lease. Defendant No. 2 has been in continuous possession of the said land and has perfected his title by adverse possession. Since the suit land is the subject-matter of the grant by the Government, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the legal effects of the sale-deed dated 16-5-1950 in favour of defendant No. 2, because the grantor Government alone is entitled, if at all, to resume it.