K NARSIMHULU Vs. VENUGOPALASWAMY VARU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and decreed dated 8/11/1996 passed in O.S.No.59 of 1996 by the District Judge, Vizianagararn. The appellant is the defendant in the suit O.S.No.59 of 1996 filed by the respondent/plaintiff - Devasthanam for recovery of possession of the suit schedule mentioned 13 acres of wet land from the defendant and to direct the defendant to handover vacant possession of the same with standing crops and direct the defendant to render true and correct account of the mesne profits derived from the suit lanes from 30.08.1975 till delivery to the plaintiff with interest at 18% per annum and for costs of the suit. The suit was decreed with costs and future profits were directed to be determined on filing a separate application. The parties herein are referred to as they were arrayed in the suit.

(2.) It is the case of plaintiff-Devasthanam that the suit schedule land admeasuring 13 acres wetland covered by Patta No.33, Sy.No.6 situated a Kothavalasa Village and Mandal, Vizianagararn District, belongs to the plaintiff deity and the said suit lands were proposed to be auctioned by way of public auction for a period of six years. Apart from ether terms and conditions in the conditions of sale dated 13/5/1975, it was specifically stated and explained to the defendant and others present that the proposed auction has to be approved and confirmed by the higher authorities of the Endowments Department.

(3.) In the actual auction proceedings held on 13.05.1975 the defendant became the highest bidder for Rs.1,000/- rent per year and it was brought to the notice of the defendant that the auction has got to be approved by the higher authorities of the Endowments Department and thereafter he is bound to enter into a regular registered lease deed with respect to the suit lands and obtain possession thereof from the Hereditary Trustee. But without waiting for the approval or confirmation of the auction, the defendant prevailed upon the then Hereditary Trustee and took undue advantage of his dire need of money, temped him with same and obtained from him a cowl on 30/8/1975; locally called as KADAPA in favour of the plaintiff-deity for six years in respect of the suit schedule lands. It is stated that six years period is already over by 1981-82. It is stated that when the then Hereditary Trustee (Nunna Appalacharyulu) submitted the auction proceedings for approval and confirmation of the Commissioner of Endowments Hyderabad, through the Assistant Commissioner; the Commissioner did not confirm the same on the ground that the highest bid of Rs.1,000/- per year as rent for the suit wet lands measuring Ac 13.00 cents is not fair and reasonable when compared to the prevailing rates and directed the Hereditary Trustee to adjust the bid amount of the defendant towards the damages for use and occupation and lease cut the same again through public auction as early as possible. The Hereditary Trustee issued a registered notice dated 24/3/1976 to the defendant intimating him of the two proceedings dated 26/2/1976 and 14/3/1976 issued by the Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad and the Assistant Commissioner, Anakapalli, respectivelv, stating that the auction held on 13/5/1975 stood cancelled and demanded the defendant for payment of balance of the damages for use and occupation of the suit lands for the year 1975-76 and the defendant acknowledged receipt of the same on 26/3/1976. The Hereditary Trustee issued another notice dated 21/12/1981 calling upon the defendant to vacate the suit lands by 31/3/1982 and also pay damages for use and occupation of the same but the defendant did not vacate the same.