JAMPANA RAMA RAJU Vs. KANURI SURYANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam in O.S. No.100 of 1989 dated 17-3-1998 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs for evicting the defendants from the plaint A-schedule lands and for ascertainment of future profits from the date of filing of the suit till the date of delivery of possession on an application filed by the plaintiffs.

(2.) The facts, which are not in dispute and necessary for disposal of the appeal, are as under :

(3.) Plaint A-schedule land consists of two items viz., Items 1 and 2. Item No.1 comprises of Ac.5.57cts., in R.S. No.250; Item No.2 comprises of Ac.7.22 cts., in R.S. No.244 of Atapaka Village which is in possession of defendants 1 and 2 respectively. Originally the land belongs to Kasinathuni Tripuramba who purchased under two registered sale deeds dated 30-9-1901 and 4-7-1902 under Exs.Al and A2 respectively and gifted the said properties to her only daughter-Bramaramba under a gift deed dated 13-3-1919 who again settled the properties on her mother Tripuramba under settlement deed dated 22-11-1936 creating absolute rights in item 2 and reserving vested right on item 1 of plaint-A Schedule. Plaintiffs allege that Bramaramba executed a Will-Ex.A4 dated 9-2-1968 bequeathing the property in favour of Annapurna and Purna Parvatheesam- plaintiffs' vendors and also some other properties to others, as she is the absolute owner of the said properties on her mother's death. On the death of Bramaramba, properties devolved upon the legatees who got released golden ornaments and other properties as per Will. Plaint-A schedule properties were purchased by the plaintiffs under four sale deeds-Exs.A7 and A8 on 22-4-1975 and A9 and A10 on 30-12-1974 and enjoyed the schedule properties of their own right. Plaint A-Schedule property is liable to submerge whenever there is floods in Kolleru Lake and remained water lagging and unfit for cultivation. In the year 1973 lands become fit for cultivation, as drain was dug. The 1st plaintiff who was an agriculturist of the neighbouring village purchased the said lands and cultivating the same from August, 1973 by raising paddy crop which is evident from the fertilizers card issued by the R.D.O. for the supply of chemical fertilizers which were scarcity at the relevant time. From the date of purchase the plaintiffs exercised absolute rights over the suit schedule lands and cultivating the same till 1980.