G KRIAN KUMAR Vs. ALA MALLESWARA REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent executed a sale deed on 28. 02. 2001 in favour of the mother of appellants 1 to 3, the fourth appellant herein. On the same day, the fourth appellant executed an agreement of sale to convey the property in favour of the respondent. The fourth appellant is said to have gifted that property to her children, appellants 1 to 3 on 01. 09. 2008. Alleging that the respondent is interfering with their possession, appellants 1 to 4 filed O. S. No. 24 of 2009 in the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool for the relief of declaration that they are the absolute owners of the suit schedule property and for perpetual injunction against the respondent. They also filed I. A. No. 50 of 2009 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C. P. C. They pleaded that ever since the respondent sold the suit schedule property on 28. 02. 2001, it was in possession of the fourth appellant till she gifted the same to appellants 1 to 3 and thereafter, they are in possession and enjoyment of the property. It is stated that part of the property covered by the sale deed was acquired by the government and compensation thereof was paid to the fourth appellant.

(2.) THE respondent opposed the I. A. , by stating that the transaction between himself and the fourth appellant was of mortgage and that the same is evident from the execution of an agreement of sale by the fourth appellant on the same day. It is also stated that despite the sale, the possession remained with him and that the same is evidenced by the entries in the adangals. Through its order, dated 09. 03. 2009, the trial Court dismissed the I. A. Hence, this civil revision petition.

(3.) SRI T. S. Anand, the learned counsel for the appellants, submits that there is a clear recital in the sale deed marked as Ex. A-1 that the possession of the property was delivered to the fourth appellant and still, the trial Court did not recognize it. He further submits that the little doubt that existed as to the exercise of ownership rights is cleared by the award passed by the Joint collector, marked as Ex. A7, under which the compensation for the part of the land covered by the sale deed was paid to the fourth appellant. According to him, the appellants established a prima facie case and balance of convenience is in their favour for granting temporary injunction.