( 1 ) THE unsuccessful plaintiff in O. S. No. 110/73 on the file of Additional subordinate Judge, Guntur, is the appellant.

( 2 ) THE suit was instituted for cancellation and setting aside the decree in O. S. No. 45/64 on the file of Subordinate Judge, guntur, which was confirmed by the judgment and decree in A. S. No. 281/69, dated 25-6-1973 by the High Court, as not binding on the plaintiff and the 8th defendant in the suit for possession of the plaint schedule property from the defendants, except the 8th defendant and for rendition of accounts as to the realization of profits from the schedule property from 29-10-1973 till date of delivery and for costs of the suit from the defendants, except the 8th defendant.

( 3 ) THE respective pleadings of the parties are no doubt very elaborate. But however, since several factual details had been narrated in the respective pleadings, it will be appropriate to deal with the respective pleadings at the first instance.

( 4 ) SRI V. L. N. G. K. Murthy, the learned counsel representing the appellant/plaintiff had contended that the whole approach of the trial Court in appreciating the evidence is erroneous and unsustainable. T