( 1 ) THIS appeal is filed by the defendant. The respondent filed the suit O. S. No. 37 of 1960 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Srikakulam for a declaration that the adoption pleaded by the defendant was not true and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with her property. The defendant is the natural son of the plaintiff s sister. The case of the defendant is that the adoption took place on 20th May, 1957, during the lifetime of Apparao, husband of the plaintiff. Apparao died on 29th May, 1958. Thereafter a registered deed of adoption, Exhibit B-2. was executed by the plaintiff on 29th August, 1958. The plaintiff issued a notice Exhibit A-6, dated 8th March, 1960, alleging that her own father who is the maternal grandfather of the defendant prevailed upon her to execute the deed of adoption on the representation that the property will be claimed by outsiders. On the date of the registered notice, she executed a-5 cancelling the deed of adoption. The defence to the suit is that though the adoption took place during the life-time of Apparao, the deed was executed later on merely as evidence of the transaction and that the adoption was true. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document