M. SUNITHA YADAMMA Vs. M.RAMULAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Krishna Mohan Sikharam, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri D. Prakash Reddy, learned senior counsel represented Sri B. Rajeshwar Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Aggrieved by the judgment and decree in O.S.No.507 of 2018 dtd. 5/3/2018 on the file of Court of XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District, the appellant filed this appeal suit.

(3.) The plaintiffs are the grandchildren of Late Laxmiah and Late Pentiah, who were both pattedars of the agricultural land in question. In 1970, Late Pentiah sold his share in the land to Late Laxmiah, who then became the absolute owner of the entire property. The annual yield from the land was given to the plaintiffs' father, Late Ramchander, who was a government servant. Late Ramchander died, leaving behind the plaintiffs and the respondents as his legal heirs. The plaintiffs were minors at the time of his death, so they never interfered with the affairs of the property. The eldest son, Respondent No. 10, was looking after the property and is currently in occupation of it. On January 15, 2008, the plaintiffs demanded a partition of the property from their mother, respondent No.1. She gave them an evasive reply, so the plaintiffs made inquiries and found out that the defendants had colluded to alienate the property by executing a forged sale deed in the name of Late Ramchander. The plaintiffs argue that the sale deed is forged and fabricated, and that even if it were genuine, it would only be binding to the extent of Late Ramchander's share in the property. They also argue that the defendants have executed further sale deeds in collusion with other people, and that all of these sale deeds are liable to be cancelled.