NERUSU SEETHARAVAMMA Vs. NERUSU DURGAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nerusu Seetharavamma, the unsuccessful defendant in both the courts below had preferred the second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (herein after in short referred to as 'Code' for the purpose of convenience). Nerusu Durgaiah, respondent herein, the plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No.85 of 1984 on the file of the Principal Munsif Magistrate, Repalle, for declaration that the schedule property belongs to the plaintiff with absolute rights and for possession of the said property and also for future profits and costs of the suit.

(2.) Before the court of first instance, on the respective pleadings of the parties having settled the issues, the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 and Dws.1 and 2 was recorded and Exs.A-1 to A-9 were marked and ultimately the court of first instance came to the conclusion that the respondent in the present second appeal, the plaintiff in the suit, is entitled to a decree and directed the defendant, the appellant herein to deliver item No.1 of the plaint schedule property along with standing trees and crops and deliver item No.2 after removing the standing structures or trees thereon, standing in the way of delivery of item No.2 of the schedule property to the plaintiff at her costs within one week from the date of judgment. Otherwise, the plaintiff is at liberty to get it delivered through court and recover the expenses from the defendant and the future mesne profits to be ascertained by a separate application. Aggrieved by the same, the defendant in the said suit carried the matter by way of appeal A.S.No.77 of 1990 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Tenali and the appellate court dismissed the said appeal with costs. Aggrieved by the same, the present second appeal is preferred.

(3.) The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration in this second appeal.