( 1 ) THIS appeal is preferred by the defendants being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 6-7-1988 passed in A. S. No. 141 of 1982 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Kakinada. By the impugned judgment and decree the appellate Court has reversed the judgment and decree of the 1st Addl. Munsif, Kakinada dated 16-8-1982 passed on his file O. S. No. 673 of 1978. In other words, the trial Court has dismissed the plaintiff s suit and the appellate Court has decreed it. Therefore, the defendant has come up to this Court by way of this second appeal.

( 2 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the appellants-defendants strenuously contended that the judgment and decree of the appellate Court is wholly illegal and contrary to the pleadings and evidence on record. He further submitted that under sections 54 and 55 of the Transfer of property Act once the properties purchased in the name of the appellant-plaintiff to the extent of half share each, the title of the defendant cannot be divested and at the most the plaintiff may claim for the contribution of the sale consideration with interest, but the plaintiff cannot be declared as the owner of the property purchased b