LAWS(PVC)-1923-4-34

K VENKATARAMAYYA Vs. KPITCHAMMA

Decided On April 04, 1923
K VENKATARAMAYYA Appellant
V/S
KPITCHAMMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the parties will be styled according to their designation in appeal No. 332 of 1920 presented against the decree in O.S. No. 25 of 1919. The plaintiff is the minor natural brother of one Raghavayya who was adopted by one Guruvarayudu and his wife Pitchamma, the 1 defendant. The 2nd defendant is Raghavayya's widow and the 3 defendant is her father, the 4 defendant being the minor son of the 3 defendant. This Raghavayya died on the 20 of November, 1915 leaving a Will, Exhibit A, which was executed on the 17th November, 1915 and registered on the 20th. Under this Will he left certain properties to his mother, his wife and his father-in-law respectively and also the family house to the plaintiff and made the plaintiff his residuary legatee. Shortly after his death, disputes arose between the plaintiff's father and guardian and defendants 1 to 3, and a criminal complaint was filed by plaintiff's guardian against defendants 1 and 3 and their gumasta under Section 404 of the Indian Penal Code, on the 6 of March, 1916.

(2.) Search warrants were issued and a largo quantity of property was found in the 1st defendant's house and also in the house of one Sitamma. This property consisted of cash, jewels, house-hold utensils, promissory-notes and account-books and other papers. When Sitamma was examined she said that the property so found did not belong to her but had been deposited with her by the 1 defendant for safe custody and among the properties found in Sitamma's house were a number of promissory-notes executed in favour of the testator Raghavayya. No satisfactory explanation has been given as to why these properties were secreted in Sitamma's house and it can only have been with a view to evade the claims of the plaintiff who was entitled to the property under Raghavayya's Will.

(3.) The Criminal case was eventually dismissed and the properties found at the search were returned either to the defendants or to their agent. Subsequently there seems to have been some mediation, but in 1917 a notice was sent on behalf of the plaintiff to the defendants claiming the testator's property and, finally, in November, 1918, these three suits were filed.