POGIRI JAGANNADHARAO Vs. GORLA VENKATINAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the District Judge, Srikakulam dated 28-12-1998 passed in C.M.A.No. 60 of 1996 dismissing the appeal preferred against the order of the II Addl. District Munsif passed in I.A.No. 229 of 1996 in O.S.No. 216 of 1996 refusing temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff in the suit.

(2.) The admitted facts as emerging from the affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner and respondent No. 1 in the LA. may be stated as follows: The plaint schedule property belongs to one Gorle Jagannadhamnaidu, maternal grandfather of the petitioner who gave the plaint schedule properties to his daughter Ramudamma, the mother of the petitioner, under a registered settlement deed dated 10-6-1950, the registration extract of which has been marked as Ex.A-1. Ramudamma enjoyed the properties till her death. Ramudamma had four issues i.e., two sons and two daughters. One of the daughters Appalanarasamma died unmarried and whereabouts of her second son Narasingarao is not known since so many years. The petitioner is the other son and his sister Gorle Venkataratnam who is the wife of the first respondent is the other daughter of said Ramudamma, who died in the year 1980.

(3.) However, the petitioner's case is that Gorle Venkata Ratnam, the wife of the first respondent i.e., the sister of the petitioner never claimed the plaint schedule properties and she died in the year 1980. According to the petitioner, after his mother's death, his father enjoyed the property and after his father's death, he is in enjoyment of the properties inasmuch as his brother's whereabouts are not known, his another sister Appalanarasamma died unmarried and the other sister i.e., wife of respondent No. 1 never claimed any interest in the suit properties. It is on this basis, the petitioner asserts that he has been in physical possession of the suit properties for all these years by paying land revenue and house-tax etc.