( 1 ) JUDGEMENT :- Defendants 2 and 3 are the appellants. The Ist respondent, after becoming major, the 2nd respondent being minor represented by his brother the Ist respondent, laid the suit but subsequently he was declared as major by order dt. June 29, 1977 in I. A. No. 392 of 1977. The suit was for possession of plaint A and B schedule properties and to eject the 1st defendant from plaint A Schedule property and the appellants from plaint B Schedule property consisting of one acre. The trial Court granted decree, as against it, the appellants have filed this appeal.

( 2 ) THE admitted case is, that one Bathina Krishna Murthy, the 7th defendant is their father and Bathina Nandeeswaramma the 4th defendant is mother. The father executed a gift deed, Ex. A-3 dt. Feb. 21, 1956, gifting over the plaint schedule property and other properties in favour of the respondent, appointing their mother as guardian. Subsequently, the mother executed on behalf of the respondents, the contract of sale dated February 9, 1964 under Ex. B-7 alienating the B Schedule property, in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the appellants for a valuable consideration of Rs. 2,800/- and rece