AKKIRAJU SARASWATHI Vs. MOHD JAHANGIR PASHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants 8 and 9 preferredl this Second Appeal, against the judgment and decree, dated 29.08.2005, passed by the learned I Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, in A.S.No.110 of 2000. That appeal was filed against the judgment and decree, dated 11.09.2000, passed by the learned XVIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad, in O.S.No.545 of 1991. Defendant No.9 is the legal representative of defendant No.7. The suit was filed by the first respondent herein. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit.

(2.) An extent of about Ac.16.00 of land in Survey Nos.61 and 62 of Trimulgherry Village, Secunderdbad Cantonment, was jointly purchased by Mohd. Sharifuddin, father of the plaintiff, J.Narisimulu Mudiraj and Mohd. Karimullah, through a sale deed, dated 05.05.1958. The land was divided into plots and plot Nos.111/A and 134/A were sold in favour of the 4th defendant, through a sale deed, dated 15.03.1959. According to the plaintiff, the extent sold to the 4th defendant is only 600 square yards, whereas the latter started obtaining permission from the authorities under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, and undertaking transactions, as though the extent is 1600 square yards.

(3.) He obtained a certified copy of the sale deed, dated 15.03.1959, which depicted the extent as 600 square yards only. On the basis of the same, he made complaints before the various authorities against the 4th defendant. The plaintiff further pleaded that defendants 2 and 3, the authorities of the Registration Department, have altered the extent in the registration book, with the collusion of the 4th respondent, through an endorsement, dated 20.12,1989, from 600 sq.yards, to 1600 sq. yards. The 4th defendant entered into an agreement of sale with defendants 7 and 5, for sale of the suit schedule property and for that purpose, he executed general power of attorney in favour of defendants 5 and 6. On the death of the 71h defendant, the 9lh defendant was brought on record.