High Court of Andhra Pradesh
MR. JUSTICE V.V.S. RAO
Dr K. Subbaiah
Versus
C.N. Krishnamacharlu & Another
Appeal Suit No.150 OF 1991 & Transfer A.S.No.1474 OF 2001
Decided on: 29-12-2010
Clauses Act, 1897 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 29 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 3,.91 to 95 - Transfer of Property Act - Sections 119,5, 122 to 129 - Sections 127, 55, 60 - Sale of Goods Act - Section 64-A - Power of Attorney Act, 1882 - Indian Stamp Act 1899 - Section 2(21) - Indian Succession Act - Section 88 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 145 - - Court battle for the property - Suit schedule property - constructions - Suit schedule in occupation - Appeals arise out of the same Judgment of Court is filed by defendant and other transferred appeal is filed by defendants legal representatives of defendant who died during pendency of suit - Appeal filed before the Court of the District Judge stands transferred to this Court - Dispute in these cases is in respect of land admeasuring in town - Persons who were allegedly members of Club on the one hand and the first and second generation legal heirs of late are fighting this three decades long drawn Court battle for the property - In this Judgment - plaintiff is son of CSN - They instituted the suit registered as on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge which was transferred - Court of the Subordinate Judge - It was instituted for declaration of plaintiffs right to the suit schedule property together with open site constructions structures and improvements made thereon – Held, Case of defendant Sub Divisional Magistrate directed to close the Club and handover the property to those who succeed in the suit the Club was closed on the orders of RDO by way of prohibitory order defendant for construction of two rooms on the northern side and thus the Club property was alienated by the transferees and defendants did not oppose the suit on the ground that the Club activities were being carried on the ground that they have vested interest in the property - Court already held that Ex.A1 granted by the predecessors of the plaintiff and that they are entitled to seek resumption of the land especially when they proved that the Club stopped its activities and it became a place for criminal activities and went into disrepute - Point is answered accordingly in of plaintiffs against the defendants - Appeals are devoid of any merit and are accordingly dismissed.
Common Judgment
INTRODUCTION
These two appeals arise out of the same Judgment of the trial Court. A.S.No.150 of 1991 is filed by defendant No.10 and the other transferred appeal is filed by defendants 12 and 13, the legal representatives of defendant No.8, who died during pendency of suit. The appeal filed before the Court of the District Judge, Kadapa stands transferred to this Court. The dispute in these cases is in respect of land admeasuring 0.67 cents in survey No.455 (suit schedule property) in Proddatur town. The persons who were allegedly members of Sundaracharlu Club (the club, for brevity) on the one hand and the first and second generation legal heirs of late Curram Sundaracharlu (CSC) are fighting this three decades long drawn Court battle for the property. In this Judgment, the parties are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.
PLEADINGS
C.S.Narasimhacharlu (CSN), C.S.Krishnamacharlu (CSK) and C.N.Srinivasacharlu (CNS) are sons of CSC. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 are sons of CSK and third plaintiff is son of CSN. They instituted the suit registered as O.S.No.69 of 1980 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Proddatur, which was transferred as O.S.No.68 of 1985 to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kadapa. It was instituted for declaration of plaintiffs right to the suit schedule property together with open site, constructions, structures and improvements made thereon, to declare the right of the plaintiffs and first defendant to the portion of the suit schedule in occupation of defendant No.8 and for a direction to defendants 12 to 18 to deliver possession of the property. Their case in the plaint is as below.
The suit schedule property was originally owned by CSC. He died in 1922, leaving behind his three sons. On 13.05.1938, CSN and CSK executed a registered document in favour of M/s.V.Shankara Rao, B.Bala Narayana Reddy and Ananda Rao, for the purpose of conducting the club in the memory of CSC, i.e., Sundaracharlu Club. The registered deed under which the property was demised was subject to the condition that the property shall be used for the purpose of playing tennis and taking up recreational activities. It was stipulated therein that if for any reason, the club activities are stopped, the property will revert to the donors or their legal heirs. The donees shall have no right of alienation. The property shall be used to run the club in the memory of their father CSC with a view to promote sports, games and goodwill among the public of the town. Four members of legal profession, namely, D.Krishna Rao, V.Shankara Rao, K.Bala Narayana Reddy and Ananda Rao constituted a trust. All of them were tennis players and were running tennis club in the local cotton press compound. As it was not conducive and convenient, they started ‘Sundaracharlu Club’. The trust Board took delivery of the possession and started running the club, which enjoyed good reputation. All respectable elite of the town were its members.
In 1945, necessary rules, regulations and bye-laws were framed. Elections were to be held annually for choosing office bearers and members of Managing Committee to look after the administration of the club. After the demise of the members of the trust Board, the club was being managed by elected body till 1974. Thereafter, the dignified character of the club started fading away. The club fell into disrepute and ignominy. The administration fell into the hands of group of persons and thereafter there was no general body meeting to elect the office bearers. No list of persons is maintained and the respective members of the club became helpless to raise their voice. The club went into the hands of people with shady character. It became den for bad characters with criminal conduct. It became a private affair and was not running for the purpose for which the land was donated.
The respectable and elite of the town frequently complained to the plaintiffs 1 to 3 as well as law enforcement authorities
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.