KARNAM VENKATRAMAYYA AND OTHERS Vs. ATCHANNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs are the appellants in this appeal which arises out of the judgment and decree of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Chittoor, in O.S. No. 78 of 1949, which is a suit for partition and possession of the plaintiffs' share in the properties mentioned in the schedule appended to the plaint.

(2.) The suit lands are comprised in Jodi Gudipalle village and originally belonged to the family of Rajachar, his three brothers and others. They were entitled to a ? .. "rd share in the village and the other members of the family were entitled to the remaining share. Rajachar and two of his brothers conveyed their interest in the suit property to the plaintiffs under a deed of sale dated 27th January 1946, for a consideration of Rs. 2500/-. Under the sale deed, the right to collect the rent due under a permanent lease executed by Ananda Thirthachar, father of Rajachar, was also conveyed. The plaintiffs sought recovery of a ?th share out of the ? .. "rd share which belonged to their vendors while reserving their right to claim the rent due under the permanent lease executed by their vendors' father.

(3.) In the suit the plaintiffs impleaded defendants 1 to 13. The 1st defendant is the father of defendants 2 to 7 and they are living joint. Defendants 5, 6, 8 and 9 to 13 remained exparte. Defendants 1 to 4 and 7 contested the suit. The 3rd defendant, who is the de facto manager of the family, filed a written statement which was adopted by the other contesting defendants. They denied the truth and validity of the sale relied upon by the plaintiffs. According to them, the plaintiffs or their predecessors were never in possession of the suit properties at any time within twelve years prior to suit, and that on the other hand defendants 1 to 7 have been the exclusive owners and have been in exclusive possession of the entire village. They raised various other defences, the chief of which are that the suit lands are situated in an estate and that they are entitled to the kudiwaram and occupancy rights in the village; that the suit is barred under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code and that it is also barred under Order II, Rule 2 of the Code.