BOBBILI GOWRESU Vs. KOTTU SUBHADRAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for determination in this Second Appeal is whether the defendant is estopped from denying the title of the plaintiff, his landlady, under section 116 of the Evidence Act.

(2.) The facts which have given rise to this Second Appeal may be stated : The defendant executed a kadapa on the 3rd of August, 1947, in respect of the land comprised in survey Nos.166/6 and 168 in favour of the plaintiff. The appeal is now confined to survey No.168, which is of the extent of acre 1-70 cents. According to the defendant, this extent of land comprised in the latter survey number was in his encroachment and that of his predecessors-in-title for over sixty years and as such the plaintiff has no interest or title in the said survey number. He also contended that the Government is a necessary party, that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff and himself in respect of Survey No. 168 and that the suit is liable to be dismissed on that score.

(3.) The case of the defendnt that the encroachment and reclamation of the suit land was on his own behalf without reference to the plaintiff and that the same has been in his possession for more than sixty years has been found to be untrue. Both the Courts held that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the plaintiff and the defendant in respect of survey No.168 and that the defendant was not entitled to set up the title of the Government.