BODDU VEERAIAH Vs. ARIPIRALA VENKATA LAXMAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above Letters Patent Appeal is filed by defendants 11, 12, 14 and 15 in O. S. No. 2 of 1956 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge. Narasaraopet which arose under the following circumstances: The plaintiff Aripirala Venkata Laxmamma filed the suit for recovery of possession of the properties shown in the plaint-schedule on the ground that she was the heir to the properties of one Korukonda Suryanarayana who was the owner of the said properties, that he died in or about the year 1900 leaving his widow Ramalaxmamma alias Ramamma, that a deed of surrender, Ex, B-7. executed on 12-5-1924 by the widow was invalid and that after the death of the widow, Ramalaxmamma, on 2-8-1954. she became entitled to succeed to the estate. The relationship between the parties is shown in the pedigree shown in the pedigree shown here below: The plaintiff entered into compromises with various defendants except the above appellants (Defendants 11, 12, 14 and 15) who claimed items 13 and 14 which are Ac 4-25 cents and Ac. 3.20 cents dry respectively as alliances from defendants 1 and 2 all of whom contend that the surrender by the widow was valid.

(2.) The plaintiff seeks to attack the validity of the surrender on three grounds: Firstly, that the surrender is a device to divide the estate intended to benefit her nominee, the first defendant, and hence not bona fide, secondly that the surrender was not made in favour of the entire body of reversioners and thirdly that the surrender was not in respect of the entire estate of the last male holder. Both the trial Court as well as the High Court on appeal in A. S. No. 193 of 1958 decreed the suit.

(3.) We will now take up the first question, viz., whether the surrender was not bona fide in the sense that it was a device to divide the estate between the plaintiff and the reversioners and by which she reserved a benefit to her nominee, the first defendant. As already stated, the widow Ramalaxmamma executed the surrender on 12-5-1924 under Ex. B-7 in favour of the nearest reversioner Satyanarayana who was the last male holder Suryanarayanas fathers brothers son (vide pedigree). On the same day, i.e., 12-5-1924, the surrenderee Satyanarayana executed a deed of maintenance Ex. B-8 in favour of the widow giving her Ac. 7-00 out of a total extent of Ac. 28-00 towards her maintenance. Again on 15-5-1924 the surrenderee Satyanarayana executed a deed of gift, Ex. B-9 in favour of the first defendant who was his brother Kutumbayyas son conveying a portion of the property got by him by virtue of the surrender for the reasons stated in the gift dead.