ATLURU CHANDRA SEKHARA RAO Vs. ATLURU MAHESH BABU AND ORS.
LAWS(APH)-2019-2-16
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on February 22,2019

Atluru Chandra Sekhara Rao Appellant
VERSUS
Atluru Mahesh Babu And Ors. Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MAHARAJA OF VIZIANAGARAM BY HIS GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND,F.W. GILLMAN V. SRI RAJAH SETRUCHERLA SOMASEKHARARAZ BAHADUR AND RAMABHADRARAZ BAHADUR [REFERRED TO]
U BRANSLY NONGSIANG VS. U DROLISHON SYIEMIONG [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR VS. SECRETARY CITY CIVIL COURT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]
KOTHAKAPU MUTHYAM REDDY VS. BHARGAVI CONSTRUCTIONS [REFERRED TO]
M/S. LEELA ENTERPRISES VS. KAMAR SULTANA @ KAMER HASSAN [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J. - (1.)One Atluru Chandra Sekhara Rao, petitioner herein and defendant in O.S.No.68 of 2017 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gudivada, filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the award passed by the Mandal Legal Services Committee, Gudivada under the provisions of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short 'Act').
(2.)The first respondent filed O.S.No.68 of 2017 claiming declaration that the Revocation Deed dated 19.03.2012 bearing Document Nos.2689/2012 and 2691/2012 are null and void, inoperative and consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants including the petitioner from ever interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property, alleging that, on 08.02.2012 the defendant has executed two settlement deeds, settling the plaint schedule properties vide Document Nos.1213/2012 and 1214/2012 and by virtue of the said documents, Item No.l which is the agricultural land retained with the defendant during his life time and he is entitled to enjoy the usufruct from the same and whereas, plaint schedule Item No.2 is put in the possession of the plaintiff on the same day and thus the plaintiff has become the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property by virtue of the said documents. Thus, the plaintiff is enjoying the plaint schedule property from the date of execution of the documents acting upon the settlement deed. The petitioner has got only right to enjoy the property during lifetime.
(3.)The first respondent herein during his lifetime came to know that the defendant at the instigation of his daughter Gullapalli Naga Mani took advantage, defendant got executed revocation deeds and thereafter the plaintiff obtained certified copies on 06.03.2017, having gone through the said documents dated 19.03.2012, the plaintiff came to know the factum of cancellation of documents i.e. Settlement Deeds by executing cancellation deeds bearing Document Nos.2689/2012 and 2691/2012 and though those deeds were executed unilaterally by the defendant, the documents are nonest in the eye of law and not binding upon the plaintiff, since the plaintiff is not a party to the said cancellation deeds and sought the relief stated above.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.