G LAXMAMMA Vs. NARASIMHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-respondent in A.S. No.109 of 1986 is the appellant in S.A. No.125 of 1989. The suit was filed for declaration of title in respect of a vacant site measuring 81.60 sq. yards, being Plot No.9 and Municipal No.1-8-588/31, Azamabad, Hyderabad and for permanent injunction.

(2.) The case of the appellant is; she purchased the suit land under a Registered sale deed dated 14-7-1980, from one Parameshwar, who in turn purchased the same from one Bhimaiah. Ever since the appellant is in peaceful possession. While so, the second respondent-defendant who was employed as Watchman by the vendor in collusion with the first defendant-respondent threatened to dispossess the appellant. Hence, she filed the suit.

(3.) The first respondent in his written statement stated that he entered into an agreement of sale dated 15-5-1978 with the original owner Sri Gundla Bhimaiah, for a total consideration of Rs.5,000/-, paid an advance amount of Rs.2,000/- and he was put in possession in part performance of the contract. He permitted the second respondent to errect a hut to reside therein, that devotees of the locality constructed a Shiva Temple on the suit land by raising donations. Therefore, the suit has to be dismissed. The plaintiff examined herself as P.W.1 besides examining three more witnesses including her vendor as P.W.2. She also marked Exs.A-1 to A-7. The first respondent examined himself as D.W.I besides two other witnesses and marked Exs.B-1 and B-l(a). The suit was originally decreed by the trial Court which was confirmed in appeal. In second appeal, the said decree was set aside and the matter was remanded to the trial Court for fresh disposal, after giving opportunity to both the parties to adduce further evidence. After remand, the trial Court decreed the suit and the appellate Court reversed the said finding in appeal. Hence the second appeal.