KOTHAKAPU MUTHYAM REDDY Vs. BHARGAVI CONSTRUCTIONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants herein are the plaintiffs in O.S. No.107 of 2010. They sought a decree in their favour, and against the defendants, to declare para 18 of the compromise recorded in O.S. No.481 of 2007 before the Lok Adalat dated 22.08.2007, in so far as it related to land admeasuring Ac.9.29 gts of land in Sy. Nos.271, 272 and 273 shown to have created rights in favour of defendant No.31 i.e., M/s. Bhargavi Constructions represented by Sri V. Ramachandra Rao, as nonest in law for having been obtained by fraud and collusion, by playing fraud upon the plaintiffs; and for grant of a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, especially defendant No.31, their agents, servants, employees etc., from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiffs in respect of the suit schedule A, B and C properties.

(2.) IN this plaint filed in O.S. No.107 of 2010, the appellants stated that the 1st plaintiff had purchased land admeasuring Ac.25.00 cts in Sy. Nos.262, 274 under registered sale deed dated 06.07.1974 from Sri Jamaluddin and others; the first plaintiff also purchased Ac.6.10 gts from Sri Jamaluddin in the year 1975, which was confirmed by a deed of confirmation dated 24.04.1985; Sri Mohd. Kareemuddin had obtained a loan from Sri K. Mutyam Reddy, and had mortgaged the land admeasuring Ac.6.10 guntas, in the year 1982, by executing the mortgage deed; in addition thereto, land admeasuring Ac.12.20 gts was also in possession of the plaintiffs since June, 1993; between themselves, the plaintiffs were in peaceful possession and enjoyment of a total extent of Ac.50.00 gts of land in Sy. Nos.262 to 274 in Poppulaguda village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District; as Sri Md. Khairuddin, Ajeemuddin and Kareemuddin, were interfering, the 1st plaintiff filed the injunction suit in O.S. No.333 of 1992 which was decreed in his favour; as the patta was not mutated in his name, the 1st plaintiff filed O.S. No.259 of 1994 against Sri Jamaladdin and others for declaration of his title and for perpetual injunction; on O.S. No.259 of 1994 being dismissed on 05.04.2004, the 1st plaintiff filed A.S. No.2323 of 2005; during the pendency of the said appeal, the 1st defendant filed O.S. No.481 of 2007 for specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 28.12.1995 in respect of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.51.29 gts in Sy. No.262 to 274 of Poppulaguda village, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District; the plaintiffs, in the present Suit, were arrayed as defendants 22 to 25 therein; however, on the intervention of mediators, a compromise was arrived at; under the terms of the settlement, the plaintiffs were to relinquish Ac.41.34 gts, and the 1st plaintiff would be left with Ac.9.29 gts; from out of the total extent of Ac.41.34 gts, it was agreed that Ac.10.20 gts of land would be transferred in the name of Sri Ratangapani Reddy i.e., the son -in -law of the first plaintiff; the remaining land was to be given to the 1st plaintiff; an area of land, admeasuring Ac.6.25 gts, had been acquired for the outer ring road; the schedule of payment of money was also incorporated, in the compromise, only to the extent of Ac.25.00 gts; the defendants surreptitiously added therein that the plaintiffs had given up their rights in respect of land admeasuring Ac.9.29 gts in favour of M/s. Bhargavi Constructions, represented by Sri V. Ramachandra Rao, who were not parties to O.S. No.481 of 2007; no compromise could be recorded with persons who were not parties to the suit; immediately after the compromise was recorded in the Lok Adalat, a sale deed was executed on the same day in favour of M/s. Grandbay Estate Developers Ltd and Venezia Estate Developers Ltd., vide document No.8379 of 2007 dated 22.08.2007 in respect of land admeasuring Ac.14.02 gts in Sy. Nos.263 to 270; another agreement of sale with irrevocable GPA dated 22.08.2007 was entered into with Sri K. Ratangapani Reddy in respect of land admeasuring Ac.10.20 gts in Sy. Nos.272/1 and 273/1; execution of these documents went on till late in the night; while they received money as stated in the compromise, averments relating to the remaining extent of land admeasuring Ac.9.29 gts were surreptitiously included therein as if the plaintiffs had given up their rights in favour of M/s. Bhargavi Constructions represented by Sri V. Ramachandra Rao, which was never the terms of compromise; if there was any such understanding, the document would have been executed on the same day; no such document was executed on that date; the aforesaid documents were executed not only by the plaintiffs, but by the other defendants also; the plaintiffs are illiterate, and are not well versed with court proceedings; as per the representation made by Sri S. Narayana Reddy, Sri D.S. Karunakar Reddy, the matter was referred to the Lok Adalat; a compromise memo was filed before the Lok Adalat and the signatures of the plaintiffs herein, ie the defendants in O.S.No.481 of 2007, were obtained therein; the proceedings of the Lok Adalat basically state that the compromise arrived at is in respect of the suit schedule property; an award was passed by the Lok Adalat, Ranga Reddy District dated 22.08.2007, and terms of the compromise were signed by the parties; even after the compromise, the 1st plaintiff and his family members continue to be in occupation, possession and enjoyment of the property admeasuring Ac.9.29 gts till date; O.S.No.643 of 2007 was filed by M/s. Bhargavi Constructions on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District which was later renumbered as O.S. No.42 of 2009; and, in para 18 of the compromise, the following lines were added:

(3.) THE appellants -plaintiffs further stated that the decree, obtained by surreptitious means before the Lok Adalat by the defendants, did not create any interest in favour of defendant Nos.31 and 32; there was no question of the plaintiffs relinquishing their rights in respect of Ac.9.25 guntas of land; there was, in fact, no relinquishment; this is also apparent as O.S.No.42 of 2009, filed by M/s. Bhargavi Constructions, is still pending before the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District; the plaintiffs realised the ill -intentions of defendant Nos. 31 and 32 only in the last week of October, 2009 when persons, claiming on behalf of M/s. Bhargavi Constructions, tried to illegally trespass into the plaint schedule property; when they were questioned by the plaintiffs, they referred to the decree passed in O.S. No.481 of 2007; on a careful examination of the decree, they were shocked to find that surreptitious insertions were made in para 18 of the compromise; in the circumstances, an out and out fraud was placed upon the plaintiffs while obtaining their signatures on the said compromise; even otherwise the said compromise, including the contents of para 18 especially in the highlighted portion, could not have been recorded and could not be given effect to as it is beyond the scope of the compromise, as contemplated under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, even after its amendment; it is apparent from the rough sketch plan with respect to Ac.9.29 gts, that the entire extent of land is not a contiguous piece of land, as the three portions are separately shown; the action of defendant Nos.31 and 32, (ie M/s.Bhargavi Constructions and Sri V. Ramachandra Rao) in collusion with the other defendants, is fraudulent; it has given a cause of action to the plaintiffs to seek redresal; the compromise was recorded before the Court on 22.08.2007; the plaintiffs have initiated the present action, in the nature of a suit for declaration, within three years of realising the fraud played upon them; the plaintiffs actually came to know of the said fraud only in the last week of October, 2009; and, even otherwise, the suit is filed within three years from 22.08.2007.