Chinta Subbarao, vs Chinta Peda Venkateswararao ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5469 AP

               HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
                             MAIN CASE : S.A.No.345 of 2022
                                     PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl.     Date                                        ORDER                                       OFFICE
No.                                                                                              NOTE

      22.08.2022   SRS,J
                                             I.A.No.4 of 2022
                         This petition is filed under Section 146 read with
                   Section 151 of C.P.C. seeking leave to permit wife, sons
                   and daughter of deceased Pitchaiah i.e. appellant No.2 to
                   prosecute the above second appeal.

                         The lower appellate Court pronounced judgment on
                   14.12.2021 in A.S.No.8 of 2015 and after pronouncement
                   of the judgment, appellant No.2 died on 11.02.2022 leaving
                   behind    wife,    two    sons     and   daughter      as    his     legal
                   representatives.

                         For the reasons mentioned in the affidavit, leave is
                   granted permitting the legal representatives of deceased
                   appellant No.2 to prosecute this appeal.

                         Accordingly this petition is ordered.

                         Registry is directed to carry out the amendment in
                   the cause title.

                                                                                      ______
                                                                                      SRS,J



                                            S.A.No.345 of 2022

                         The   present       second    appeal    is   filed   against    the
                   judgment and decree, dated 14.12.2021 passed in A.S.No.8 of
                   2015 on the file of learned XV Additional District Judge,
                   Nuzvid,   confirming       the     judgment    and     decree,     dated
                   10.02.2015 passed in O.S.No.95 of 2015 on the file of learned
                   Senior Civil Judge, Nuzvid.

                         Respondents being plaintiffs filed O.S.No.95 of 2009

against the appellants/defendants with a prayer to declare the gift deed, dated 15.02.2006 executed by defendant No.1 in faovur of appellant Nos.2 and 3/defendant Nos.2 and 3 conveying absolute rights and the subsequent issuance of title deed book and pattadar passbook in their favour in respect of the suit schedule property, as null and void, not affecting the rights acquired by the plaintiffs/respondents, in respect of their respective plots allotted to them in oral partition affected about 30 years ago.

The trial Court by judgment dated 10.02.2015, decreed the suit declaring that gift deed, dated 15.02.2006 executed by appellant No.1/defendant No.1 in favour of appellant Nos.2 and 3/defendant Nos.2 and 3 conveying absolute rights and the subsequent issuance of title deed books and pattadar passbooks in their favour as regards plainti schedule property as null and void and not effecting the rights acquired by the plaintiffs in respect of their respective plots allotted to them in oral partition. Aggrieved by the same, appellants/defendants preferred A.S.No.8 of 2015 and the lower appellate Court dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court against which the present second appeal is filed.

Heard.

Admit.

The following substantial questions of law arise for consideration.

1. Whether judgments of Courts below are vitiated in ignoring to consider the principle that in a suit for declaration, plaintiff has to plead and prove his case, but cannot rely upon the laches or weaknesses of the defendant?

2. Whether Ex.A1 and X1 relied upon by the plaintiffs were properly construed, if not judgments of the Courts below are vitiated?

3. Whether the judgments of the Courts below are vitiated in not considering presumption under Section 6 of the Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Passbook Act, 1971?

4. Whether the judgments of the Courts below are vitiated in not properly considering Exs.B2 to B4, B8, B9 and B11 to B13?

______ SRS,J ikn