KALLIMAKULA REDDY SARASWATHAMMA Vs. V VASANTHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 1st appellant is the mother of appellants 2 to 4. It is endorsed that appellants 2 to 4 are not necessary parties to the Second Appeal. Therefore, the 1st appellant is referred to as the appellant. The judgment passed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Madanapally, in A.S.No.208 of 1990, decreeing the suit in O.S.No.154 of 1985, on the file of the Court of Principal District Munsif, Punganur, is challenged in this Second Appeal.

(2.) The respondent filed the suit for the relief of cancellation of gift deed, dated 5.4.1984, executed by one Bandla Mangamma, in favour of the appellant, as being vitiated by fraud and undue influence, and for perpetual injunction, in respect of the suit schedule property. It was pleaded that the mother of the respondent died, when she (respondent) was a child, and thereafter, her father married Mangamma, who, in turn is said to have looked after and brought up the respondent. Mangamma had no issues of her own. The respondent pleaded that she was residing with her husband, and looked after the interest of her step mother. She alleged that the appellant is a distant relation of Mangamma, and taking advantage of her absence, the appellant brought into existence, a gift deed dated 5.4.1984, by playing fraud and misrepresentation upon Mangamma, in respect of the suit schedule property. Few days thereafter, Mangamma is said to have revealed the fraud played upon her, by the appellant and her husband, and immediately she executed a deed of cancellation on 24.4.1984, and on the same day, donated the suit schedule property in favour of the respondent. With these and other subsidiary pleadings, the respondent prayed for cancellation of the gift deed.

(3.) The appellant filed a written statement, denying the allegations of the respondent. She pleaded that the respondent neglected to maintain her step mother, Mangamma, and that herself and her husband were looking after the welfare of the said lady. She stated that having been impressed by the services rendered by her, Mangamma executed the gift deed, and the same was acted upon, by taking delivery of the suit schedule property. It is also contended that the subsequent cancellation would not entail in any legal consequences.