ALLA BASAVAPUNNAREDDY Vs. KALAGA KRISHNAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment of the subordinate Judge, Tenali, in O. S. No. 72 of 19S6. The plaintiff is the Appellant. The suit has been filed against an adverse claim order made in I. A. 140 of 1958 in O. S. 138 of 1952.

(2.) The facts relevant to this appeal may be briefly stated: The subject-matter of this suit is an extent of ac. 3-16 cents in S. Nos. 29 and 30-C of Velicherla Agraharam. F" The said extent was attached prior to judgment in O. S. 138 of 1952 by defendants 1 and 2 as the property of the 3rd defendant, Kamepalli Kotaiah. That was a suit for money alleged to be due from the 3rd defendant. The suit was decreed and in execution of the said decree defendants 1 and 2 brought the land to sale and purchased the same in Court auction for Rs. 6,030 on 10-1-1935. It is the case of the auction purchasers that they had taken possession through Court. I have to -state in this context that the record of the original attachment and the sale certificate were not exhibited. The said Kamepalli Kotaiah originally owned in the said Veilcherla Agraharam, ac. 3-62 cents bearing S. No. 28, ac. 6-60 cents bearing S. No. 29 and ac. 4-28 cents bearing S. No. 30-C as per Ex. A-3 sale-deed. He had purchased the said land from one Korra Sriramulu by and under a registered sale-deed Ex. A-3, dated 22-8-1941. The total extent of the lands as recited in the sale-deed is ac. 14-50 cents. The said Kamepalli Kotaiah, the 3rd defendant, suffered a money decree in O. S. 55 of 1947 on the file of the District Munsifs Court, Tenali. His lands were sold in Court auction by the decree-holder. One Lanka Kanakaiah was the Court auction-purchaser. The said Lanka Kanakaiah obtained a sale certificate for the lands purchased by him in Court auction, Ex. A-1, dated 16-10-1951 and obtained delivery through Court under delivery receipt, Ex. A-2, dated 15-12-1951. In the sale certificate Ex. A-1, the schedule of properly is noted in area as ac. 12-91 cents and as forming one plot within specified boundaries: West: Railway line. North: Land of Nanami Punniah. East; Irrigation channel. South: Jonnalagadda people, The delivery receipt Ex. A-2 recited that Lanka Kanakaiah was put in possession of the land within the boundaries specified after vacating the judgment-debtor. It was also mentioned there that the land formed one plot.

(3.) The said Lanka Kanakaiah sold away portions of the land under Ex. A-5, dated 6-11-1952. Ex. A-7, dated 6-11-1952 and Ex. A-4, dated 4-12-1952. The extents sold and the vendees were as follows: Under Ex. A-5, an extent of ac. 5-96^ cents was sold in favour of one Mopparaju Kotaiah and under Ex. A-7 an extent of ac. 3-16 cents was sold to one Kurra Hanumalah (P. W. 1) and under Ex. A-4 an extent of ac. 5-98 cents was sold to the plaintiff. It is seen that the total extent sold under these sale-deeds is an area of ac. 15-10 1/2 cents. It may at once be noticed that as against an extent of ac. 12-91 cents purchased at the Court auction by Lanka Kanakalab, he sold an extent of ac. 15-10 1/2 cents. It is said in evidence that the extent comprised within the boundaries recited in the sale certificate was about ac. 15-00. That is the evidence of P.W.2 who attested the delivery receipt Ex. A-2. The question therefore, arose whether the area comprised within the boundaries prevailed over the area specified.