MAGUNTA KOTA REDDY (DIED) AND OTHERS Vs. POTHULA CHENDRASEKHARA REDDY
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Magunta Kota Reddy (Died) And Others
POTHULA CHENDRASEKHARA REDDY
Click here to view full judgement.
BASI REDDY,J. -
(1.) Appeal No. 279 of 1955 : This appeal is by defendants 4, 6 and 7 in O. S. No. 57 of 1947 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Nellore, who were also respondents 3 to 5 in I. A. No. 168 of 1951 in that suit, against the final decree for mesne profits in respect of item 4 of the plaint A schedule lands, which was passed by the 1st Additional Subordinate Judge on 20th September, 1954. During the pendency of this appeal, the 4th defendant died and his legal representatives have been brought on record as appellants 4 and 5. In passing the above decree, the learned Subordinate Judge disagreed with the report of the Commissioner which, in his view, was thoroughly unsatisfactory and unhelpful inasmuch as the report was arbitrary, had no factual basis and was totally perverse. The learned Judge, therefore, carefully went into the matter and after scrutinising the evidence adduced by both sides, passed a decree in the following terms so far as defendants 4, 6 and 7 were concerned:
"It is further ordered and decreed that defendants 4, 6 and 7 do pay plaintiff Rs. 2,127-10-0 for F.1350; Rs. 941-14-0 for F.1351; Rs. 114-14-0 for F.1352; Rs. 320-14-0 for F.1353; Rs. 354-14-0 for F.1354; Rs. 212-14-0 for F.1355; Rs. 100/- for Fasli 1356; Rs. 53-14-0 for F.1357 and Rs. 212-14-0 for F.1358, with interest at 5 1/2% per annum from the end of the Fasli till the date of the realisation."
(2.) Before dealing with the contentions advanced on behalf of appellants, a few salient facts may be stated:
(3.) The respondent in this appeal had filed the suit O. S. No. 57 of 1947 on 25-3-1947, after he became a major, for setting aside the alienations made by his paternal uncle as his guardian. The suit was decreed in respondent's favour on 2-4-1949. The impugned sale deeds were set aside and possession of A-schedule property was ordered to be delivered to the respondent by the respective vendees. The decree provided inter alia that defendants 4, 6 and 7 should pay mesne profits for item 4 which was in their possession, and by clause (4) of the decree it was ordered that mesne profits, past and future, be determined on a separate application. In accordance with that direction, the respondent filed I. A. No. 168 of 1951 on 26-2-1951 for ascertainment of past and future profits in respect of item 4 and the other items. Subsequently the respondent filed a memo Ex. A-1 dated 25-7-1951 claiming Rs. 1490/- as mesne profits.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.