VECHALAPU RAMULU DIED Vs. VECHALAPU APPALANAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is from the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Visakhapatnam, in A.S, No. 65 of 1961, affiriming the judgment and decree of the Districr Munsiff, Chodavaram, in O.S. No. 330 of 1957 whereby the claim of the plaintiffs for declaration of their permanent rights of occupancy in the suit lands and for recovery of possession and of kist amounts and other arrears has been decreed.

(2.) The plaintiffs and the defendants have the same surname. All of them are Velamas by caste and residents of Deekshitulu Agraharam in Veeravilli taulk of Visakhapatnam district. It is common ground that Bhamidipati Bapanna and Bhamidipati Suryanarayana had each one Pathika (1/4th) and Yanamandram Kameswararao had two Pathikas (2/4) of wet and dry lands situated under Nakkellavani Cheruva of Deekshitula agraharam village, which had become an 'estate' by reason of the Madras Estates Land (Third Amendment) Act of 1936. According to the plaintiff's, the 1st plaintiff, the father of the 2nd plaintiff and the father of the 3rd plainliff obtained lease of the said lands from the above land holders in or about the year 1917 and since then had been enjoying the said lands paying cists to the members of the family of the inamdars. In or about the year 1932, they put the defendants in possession of the suit lands,which cons:st of only one Pathika belonging to Bhamidipati Bapanna, Melwaramdar, under and agreement that they should cultivate the lands as sub-tenants and should pay kist to them at the rate of Rs. 60 per year. Of the three other pathikas, the plaintiffs reserved one pathika for their own cultivation and leased out one pathika to Vechalapu Sanyasulu and another to Vechalapu Sanni, on the same conditions. We are not however, concerned with these Pathikas for the purposes of the present proceeding. All these people were cultivating the said lands and paying rents regularly up to 1949. On April 13,1949, however, a fresh kadapa was executed by the defendants' family manager, Vechalapu Pedda Buddeppa, and also Vechalapu Sanyasulu and Vechalapu Sanni, agreeing to pay kist at an enhanced rate of Rs. 80/- per pathika. The amount was agreed to be paid by Kartika Suddha 15 of the year 1949-50. After executing this lease deed, the defendants did not prove themselves as true as their word. They failed to pay the agreed lease amount. When demands were made they bided their time and finally denied the very right of the plaintiff's setting up occupancy rights in themselves.

(3.) The plaintiffs, therefore, filed the suit for delivery of possession and recovery of rent and also damages for use and occupation for the period subsequent to the stipulated period of lease. The suit, of course, was confined to one pathika in possession of the defendants. The defendants denied that they were inducted into possession of the suit lands by the plaintiffs as tenants or were paying any amount by way of rent to them. According to them, Vechalapu Buddeppa, Sanni and Sanyasulu and one Appalanaidu were brothers and were in possession of lands, known as Nakkellavari Cheruvu and Dowikam, from a long time. They partitioned these lands among themselves. After this partition, the family members of the defendants sub-divided among themselves the lands which had come to their share. Each branch thus has been separately cultivating its respective share and enjoying the same to the knowledge of all the inamdars and the plaintiffs. They were pooling together the kists and paying the consolidated amounts to the inamdars. The plaintiffs' family purchased in 1912 a portion of the Agraharam known as Nakkellavari Istuva. The 2nd plaintiff's sister also purchased from the inamdars some land and the plaintiffs and the 2nd plaintiff s sister were thus cultivating the land, one vrithi in extent.