As the parties to these proceedings are one and the same and the subject matter of both these proceedings is connected, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. AS.No.2443 of 1999 is filed challenging the judgment and decree dt.25.08.1999 in OS.No.29 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool.

3. CRP.No.1578 of 2009 is filed under Section 115 CPC challenging the order dt.17.03.2009 in EP.No.258 of 2005 in OS.No.29 of 1993 on the file of the Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kurnool.

The brief history leading to the filing of these proceedings is as under :

4. The appellants are defendant Nos.1 to 10 in the above suit. Pending appeal, 1st appellant died and appellant Nos.11 to 18 have been brought on record as his legal representatives. The sole respondent in the appeal also died pending appeal, and respondent Nos.2 to 5 have been brought on record as his legal representatives.

5. Appellant Nos.1 to 4 are brothers and are the sons of one Mirzan Baig. They are defendants 1 to 4 in the above suit. They own an extent of Acs.7.50 cents in Sy.No.1314 of Nannuru Village, Orvakal Sub-Registry, Kurnool District apart from other lands. On 01.09.1992, they borrowed a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- from the respondent/plaintiff. They executed Ex.A.1/agreement in favour of plaintiff promising to repay the said amount on 25.02.1993. The agreement recited that no interest is payable if this amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was paid by 25.02.1993, but if it is not paid, the defendant no.s 1 to 4 agreed that they would register the above land in plaintiff’s favour, on the plaintiff bearing the registration charges. The agreement also stated that if the amount is not paid by 25.02.1993 and if there is any delay in registering the land, the plaintiff can obtain a registered sale deed through legal procedures. This agreement bore the heading “agreement relating to loan of Rs.1,30,000/-” and it was signed by Defendant Nos.1 to 4. The agreement was scribed by DW.4 and attested by one B. Yellareddy. The said agreement did not contain the signature of the plaintiff.

6. Defendant Nos.1 to 4 contend that on 22.02.1993 they paid a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- to plaintiff through 4th defendant and that this was acknowledged by plaintiff by giving a receipt Ex.B.1 dt.22.02.1993. This receipt recited that plaintiff acknowledges receipt of the amount of Rs.1,10,000/- from 2nd defendant, that only Rs.20,000/- is due from them, and that as and when they paid the balance, he would return the loan agreement documents. This receipt Ex.B.1 is scribed by DW.2 and it bears the signature of plaintiff and also bears a rubber stamp affixed stating “for Balaji Finance Corporation, Managing Director”.

7. The plaintiff disputes that he executed this receipt Ex.B.1 and contends that DW.2, (whose wife Anasuyamma is a partner in the said Balaji Finance Corporation – a Firm in which the plaintiff and others are partners), concocted the receipt on certain blank papers on which the plaintiff’s signature was obtained; that such papers were obtained by DW2 from plaintiff in order to get the share of one Mahaboob Basha, who was a partner in the above firm, transferred in the name of Anasuyamma, the wife of DW2, stating that they were required to be given to the firm’s auditor PW2. The plaintiff denied the receipt of this money or the execution of the receipt although he admitted his signature on Ex.B.1.

8. Apprehending that plaintiff would forcibly take possession of the above land from them without following due process of law, on 18.2.1993, Defendant no.s 1 to 4 in O.S.29/1993 filed OS.No.65 of 1993 before the Principal District Munsif, Kurnool seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the plaintiff in OS.No.29 of 1993 from in any way interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property. They also obtained an ad interim injunction in their favour in the said suit on 22.2.1993.

9. The plaintiff, thereafter, filed OS.No.29 of 1993 for speci